From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lantry v. Lantry

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Dec 5, 2007
No. 04-07-00443-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 5, 2007)

Summary

In Lantry v. Lantry, 51 Ill. 458, the rule applicable to a transaction of this character is clearly stated (p. 465): "If A voluntarily conveys land to B, the latter having taken no measures to procure the conveyance but accepting it and verbally promising to hold the property in trust for C, the case falls within the statute, and chancery will not enforce the parol promise.

Summary of this case from Braidwood v. Charles

Opinion

No. 04-07-00443-CV

Delivered and Filed: December 5, 2007.

Appeal from the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2006-CI-07028, Honorable Lori Massey, Judge Presiding.

DISMISSED

Sitting: ALMA L. LOPEZ, Chief Justice, CATHERINE STONE, Justice, STEVEN C. HILBIG, Justice.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Bruce Lantry appeals the trial court's judgment signed April 13, 2007. Lantry's appellant's brief was due October 22, 2007. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed. On November 7, 2007, we therefore ordered Lantry to file, on or before November 19, 2007, his appellant's brief and a written response reasonably explaining his failure to timely file the brief. We further advised Lantry that if he failed to file a brief and the written response by the date ordered, we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a). Lantry has not filed a brief or the written response ordered by the court.

We therefore ORDER this appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. We further ORDER that appellee, Kathryn Lantry, recover her costs in this appeal from Bruce Lantry.


Summaries of

Lantry v. Lantry

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Dec 5, 2007
No. 04-07-00443-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 5, 2007)

In Lantry v. Lantry, 51 Ill. 458, the rule applicable to a transaction of this character is clearly stated (p. 465): "If A voluntarily conveys land to B, the latter having taken no measures to procure the conveyance but accepting it and verbally promising to hold the property in trust for C, the case falls within the statute, and chancery will not enforce the parol promise.

Summary of this case from Braidwood v. Charles
Case details for

Lantry v. Lantry

Case Details

Full title:Bruce LANTRY, Appellant v. Kathryn LANTRY, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio

Date published: Dec 5, 2007

Citations

No. 04-07-00443-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 5, 2007)

Citing Cases

Suchy v. Hajicek

( Catherwood v. Morris, 345 Ill. 617; Neagle v. McMullen, 334 id. 168; Miller v. Miller, 266 id. 522.) It is…

Stein v. Stein

It is also the rule that a mere denial by the holder of the legal title that a trust exists, or an oral…