Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-01-23
THE HIGHER COURTS
8
sSn op ses@f H. cisions Rendered at the
xessn> Galveston Sitting OF the
SupEems Court.
Supreme Court and Court OF Appeals Find
iDgs-Dscisions IN Some Long
Delayed Cases
SUPREME COURT.
correspondence OF the Gazette.

Correspondence OF the Gazette.
GALVESTON, TEX, Jan. % Phi Oa nix
Insurance Company vs. P. J. Willis &
Bro; appeal from Lampssas. The is-
suance CT writ OF punishment is not
strictly speaking, an action for the re-
covery Of debt, but is more in the
nature OF bill of discovery, and may
be filed in anticipation that
Is debt or other obligation will
mature st some future time. The prop
eIty in this case having been destroyed
bE fire, the agreement to pay the policy
WEs no longer contingent, but had become
Gbso.ute by the happening of the event
Enentioned il the policy, gu ject to be de-
Heated, however, by deferCes pleaded aud
proven, as might be done in other cases of
debt, cUnse qaeDtly the issuance of the
garnishment prior to proof Of loss CT ad-
justment of loss was not premature. II
is not necessary that the affidavit con-
troverting the garnishee's answer should
ke9ntein allegations necessary to author
~ FeeGeEy On the policy against
which the garnishment was run, id
an ordinary suit at law. All that
car be required of plaintiff is, that ne
Shall state the facts on which he relies TO
CSL1- S4I1h VIC 4tnolIhf VI ZIG 55iblSuCCJ
with suficIen: certainty to enable the
latter to prepare for his defense. There
is no Law requiring that the
is made up, should be sworn
to. Where an insurance company seeks
to avoid the obligations of policy on &C
count of fraud, the fact that its agent had
knowledge of the fraud by reeson Of his
ne ri oip In nd uvhjlo snfin0
side the scope Of his authority, will not
such fraud or estop it from insisting
on the conditions of its policy. Reversed
and Judgment rendered for the appellant.
Opinion by Maltbie, P. j. Adopted.
Maggie Woodbridge ct al. vs.. M. H,
Hancock ct al; appeal from Lamar. If
title to real estate cannot pass by nun
cupstiVe will, it's probate is OF no conse-
Quence, and the proposition that, as the
appellants did not resist the probate Of
he will, and scquiesced IN the possession
of she bene ficiary under the will and his
vendee for long time, and the
vendee having been induced by the con-
duct Of appellants to improve the land,
they are thereby estopped from asserting
their claim is unsound. Besides st the
time of the probate of said will, all Of the
appellants vera minors or married
women, aud remained under disability TO
the commence nent of this suit. In such
lease to be esl0pped their conduct must
Fhsve been Intentional and fraudulent.
Equity will enforce parole gift of land
Wnere the dowee has been put 10 posses
sion, and thereby induced to make valua-
| BILE improvements. But it is necessary
| that there be an actual delivery OF posses
Sior, aud valuable and substantial i'm
provements made with the consent
FOR knowledge of the donor or vendor
upon the faith of such q
gif; or sale; the mere taking possession
or making slight improvements is not
sufficient. The will, though IL did not
pass title, wss admissible to show that
there had been 6 previous parole sale or
gift Of the land to the beneficiary under
the will. Reversed std remsnded. Opln-
ION By MalIbie, P. J. Adopted.