Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-05-15
THE HIGHER COURTS.
synopses Of Decisions Rendered at the Present


Austin sitting.
Correspondence of the Gazette.
AUSTIN TEX, May BIB. D. Shropshire vs.
Behrens & Castle ct al. from Brown county
Opinion by stayton. The petition alleges that
the "Brownwood drug company" \ pli-
vate corporation, duly incorporated, made an
assignment of all its property, real and per
sonal and so much of the instrument Of as
signment (made an exhibit in pettion) or is
in question read as follows; For the bene-
fit Of such OF the creditors OF the Brentwood
drug company only, who will consent to
accept their proportional shares of the estate of
said company and to discharge said company
from their respective claims, and the re-
mainder, if any, to be paid to such
this agreement and the said D. B. Shropshire
on his part accepted said trust and truly cove
.;nanted and swore to faithfully perfotm his
sduties as said assignee, in accordance with the
statutes concerning assignments for the benefit
OF creditors. Witness our hand this 18th day of
April, A. D 1857. Attest;
THE BRowNwooD DRUo COMPANY,
by J. @. BERSAY, president.
W. @. MORGAN, secretary.
D. B, SHROPSHIRE, assignee. -.
After appellant or assignee took possession Of
the estate a lot OF drugs were seized uader az
tachment sworn out by appellees and this is an
action for damages on account Of the seizate.
Special exceptions were sustained to petition
the assignment instrument was mst&s
are excepted from the operation Of thes
law which render the use of seal unnecessary in
contracts between individuals. r. s., lls7.
The manner OF conveyances OF real estate by
corporation is set out in R. s., 600. It is clear
that the instrument in question because not exc
cuted under corporate seal is insufficient to CON-
vey to the assignee any real estate owned by this
corporation, which 10 give validity to the assigrk
Dnent was necessary. II in fact the corporation
owned no real estate this fact should have been
distinctly alleged. Such fact cannot be imp lied
either from ayerments OF petitions OF langu age
of instrument Affirmed.
]. n. Baker ct al. VS.. W. T. Mcfarland ct al,
administrator; from McLe5nan county. Opinion
by StaytOn. Suit by the administrator OF the
.hstate OF John lsbel, deceased, against heirs OF
William Dense to enforce specific performances
'of contract made between Dease and lsbel in
1888, whereby Isbel was to receive go acres OF
land TO be granted under g certificate for one
third league issued to Dease. The land In con-
troyersy was located and caused to be patented
by Is6el under that agreement John r.. andss
sohn w. Baker were on the land, but wtthopt
title, and they were made defendants. judy
ment tor plaintiff and also IN favor OF widow
and children of Dease. From that judgment
the Bakers alone appeal on the ground that the
evidence was not sufficient to show that the
william Dease TO whom land was granted was
the husband and father OF the defendants. The
evidence tends to show existence of three per
sons whose names were William Dease, member
pears never came 70 Texas, but there is
evidence tending to show that the Others
did. OF one OF these. however, there was no
trace, while the other was clearly identified i
as the husband and father of the person in wbxft
favor the judgment was rendered for all the5ais n
not adjudged to the estate Of Isbel. The EVIL
denee tends to show that this last named VIM.
Dease came TO Texas prior to the date Of ceTtih-
cate under which the land was granted also
that be inserted claim to land in Texas. While tie