Court Opinion

ID: 9832937
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:18:56.788227+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:55.866763
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[2] In their motion for a rehearing, the appellants insist that the trial court erred in sustaining a demurrer to that part of their petition which sought a recovery of the right of way and terminal grounds, and which was presented in the form of an action of trespass to try title. They contend that, owing to the form in which this portion of their cause of action was couched, it was good as against the general demurrer;; and that after the ruling of the court- to the-contrary they were not called upon to introduce in evidence their muniments of title. It is true that appellants did plead in the form stated; but they also specially pleaded, their title, and this disclosed the fact that they were relying upon the negotiations conducted by Walker with the citizens of Marshall — the same transactions which formed the basis of their claim for damages. All of those facts were presented in the evidence-adduced upon the trial, and were insufficient to establish either a title in the appellants,, or right of possession to the property in controversy, or the damages claimed. Hence-the error, if any, on the part of the court in sustaining the demurrer was harmless.
The motion is overruled.