Court Opinion

ID: 9832240
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:44:46.539023+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:44.618540
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
On appellant’s request, we make the following additional findings: Appellee did not establish a record title to the two lots in controversy. But, in this connection, we affirm the trial court’s fact conclusion, that appellee established a title by limitation. Appellant and her husband paid $1,350 on the contract to .purchase the tw.o lots; we also make the following-finding at her request:
“The Plaintiff-in-Error requests the-court to find that the balance due on the-purchase money contract of the two lots-was Fourteen Hundred Forty-six 'Dollars• and Sixty-Four Cents ($1446.64). That the balance due on the contract was of March 23, 1923.
“That Plaintiff-in-Error paid $400 and $550.00, a total of $950.00 from her separate personal estate.”
In all other respects, the motion for rehearing is overruled.