Court Opinion

ID: 9827325
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:25:05.684291+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:29.318615
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[3] Appellant insists that this case should be reversed on account of the change of possession. The change of possession was immaterial, except so far as it threw light upon the issue as to change of title. Appellant cites Fire Association v. Flournoy, 84 Tex. 632, 19 S. W. 793, 31 Am. St. Rep. 89. There was no escrow in that case. The issue was as to whether there was a lease or sale of the property. We quote as follows:
“The court instructed the jury, that the contract between Brady Bros, and Tickle & Black created a change in the title to the property. We think this a proper construction of the contract.” 84 Tex. 635, 19 S. W. 794, 31 Am. St. Rep. 89.
In Insurance Co. v. Clarke, 79 Tex. 25, 15 S. W. 166, 11 L. R. A. 293, cited by appellant, the court said that, if the mortgage was deposited in escrow until the wife’s signature could be obtained, it did not take effect as a mortgage.
Motion overruled.