Court Opinion

ID: 9833243
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:33:33.326093+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:00.840605
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellee has called our' attention to a technical error in the use of the word “recovery” in the statement of the judgment of the district court of Bexar county, in Simmang v. Harris et al., supra. The error referred to is found in the following clause of the original opinion: “The judgment of the District Court construed the clause of the will now at issue to bequeath a fee simple estate in Charles Harris to the land devised' by said will, and denied any recovery to the minor defendants, appellees herein.” The last clause'should read, “and the effect of this judgment is to deny that appellees were given any interest in the land bequeathed by the will.” We were unfortunate in the use of the word “recovery,” for, while the minor defendants (appellees in the instant suit) alleged in their answer in the said Bexar county district court case that their father, Charles W. Harris, was only bequeathed a life estate, and that the fee-simple title to the land was bequeathed to them, they did not ask for affirmative relief decreeing fee-simple title in them.
We have carefully considered the motion for rehearing, and the same is overruled.
Motion overruled.