Case ID: sw_283/html/0909-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WALTHALL, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Madeline G. WHITE et al. v. R. M. DUDLEY et al.
    (No. 1793.)
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
    April 15, 1926.)
    Appeal from District Court, El Paso County; P. R. Price, Judge.
    John T. Hill, Jno. F. Weeks, and Harper & Howard, all of El Paso, for appellants.
    Turney, Burges, Oulwell, Holliday & Pollard, C. L. Galloway, and Paul D. Thomas, all of El Paso, for appellees.
   WALTHALL, J.

This is a companion case to those of Madeline G. White v. L. H. Ondorff and Frank M. Murchison v. P. E. Kern et al., tried under No. 1791, consolidated and tried together by agreement of ali parties (283 S. W. 903), and that of Madeline G. White et al. v. V. H. Anderson, 283 S. W. 908, all "disposed of at this time. As in the other cases above- referred fó, the action is in trespass to try title to certain lots and blocks of land in wjiat is known and referred to as Kern Place addition to the city of El Paso, Tex.

. The material issues here presented arise upon the construetiqn to be given to the same conveyances as in the above cases, and the evidence adduced upon the trial in connection therewith are in all material features the same as there. In the above cases we have expressed the views we entertain as to the proper disposition to be made of them. After the evidence was ’in, the court instructed a verdict in favor of appellee and against appellants for tlie recovery of the property in controversy, and in favor of appellee and against appellants upon their cross-action, and judgment was rendered upon- the verdict returned.

Upon the overruling of their motion for new trial, appellants excepted, gave notice of and perfected their appeal.

Justice HIGGINS was disqualified and did not sit in this case.

We find no reversiole error, and the case is affirmed.