From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ydrogo v. Haltom

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Eastland
May 10, 1957
302 S.W.2d 670 (Tex. Civ. App. 1957)

Opinion


302 S.W.2d 670 (Tex.Civ.App. —Eastland 1957) Sacarias YDROGO, Appellant, v. Charles T. HALTOM, Appellee. No. 3312. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Eastland May 10, 1957

Ronald Smallwood, Alonso S. Perales, San Antonio, for appellant.

Charles T. Haltom, San Antonio, for appellee.

GRISSOM, Chief Justice.

This is a suit in trespass to try title to lots in San Antonio by Haltom against Ydrogo. In a trial to the court judgment was rendered for Haltom. Ydrogo has appealed.

Haltom introduced a general warranty deed from Ydrogo conveying the property in controversy to him. Ydrogo's points are that Haltom failed to deraign title from the sovereignty of the soil or from a common source and that the deed was not admissible in evidence. The evidence was admissible. When Haltom proved the conveyance by a general warranty deed of the property in controversy to him by Ydrogo, he did all that was necessary to establish a prima facie case authorizing the judgment appealed from. Under the circumstances the defendant was the common source of title. Ydrogo offered no evidence. The judgment is sustained by the following authorities. Pynes v. Dodd, Tex.Civ.App., 121 S.W.2d 1045, 1047 (Writ Ref.); Todd v. Hunt, Tex.Civ.App., 127 S.W.2d 340 (Writ Ref.); Organ v. Maxwell, Tex.Civ.App., 140 S.W. 255 (Writ Ref.); Richardson v. Pavell, 83 Tex. 588, 19 S.W. 262; Duhig v. Peavy-Moore Lumber Co., 135 Tex. 503, 144 S.W.2d 878 and 41 Tex.Jur. 513.

It is affirmed.


Summaries of

Ydrogo v. Haltom

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Eastland
May 10, 1957
302 S.W.2d 670 (Tex. Civ. App. 1957)
Case details for

Ydrogo v. Haltom

Case Details

Full title:Sacarias YDROGO, Appellant, v. Charles T. HALTOM, Appellee.

Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Eastland

Date published: May 10, 1957

Citations

302 S.W.2d 670 (Tex. Civ. App. 1957)

Citing Cases

Davis v. Gale

The Trail Court, after hearing the testimony of appellants, held since the appellants only had the one home…