Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1948–1976 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Lundgreen2 sentences1967The rule is thus stated in Davis v. Lund, (Tex.Com.App.) 41 S.W.2d 57 , and repeated in Killough v. Hinds, 161 Tex. 178 , 338 S.W.2d 707 : “When A enters upon the land in recognition of the title of B, in order for A to prevail under the 10-year statute of limitations three things must be established, (1) there must be a repudiation of the relationship thus established and claim of title adversely to that of B; (2) this repudiation and adverse claim must be clearly brought home to B as limitation will only begin to run from that date; (3) there must be adverse possession for 10 years after not 1965“In Killough v. Hinds, 161 Tex. 178 , 338 S.W.2d 707 , this Court said: ****** £í ‘The rule is thus stated in Davis v. Lund, Tex.Com.App., 41 S.W.2d 57 : When A enters upon the land in recognition of the title of B, in order for A to prevail under the 10-year statute of limitations three things must be established, (1) there must be a repudiation of the relationship thus established and claim of title adversely to that of B; (2) this repudiation and adverse claim must be clearly brought home to B as limitations will only begin to run from that date; (3) there must be adverse possession for 10 | 1 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Killough v. Hinds
green
2 sentences1976The following is from Killough v. Hinds, 161 Tex. 178 , 338 S.W.2d 707 (1960): “When A enters upon the land in recognition of the title of B, in order for A to prevail under the 10-year statute of limitations three things must be established, (1) there must be a repudiation of the relationship thus established and claim of title adversely to that of B; (2) this repudiation and adverse claim must be clearly brought home to B as limitation will only begin to run from that date; (3) there must be adverse possession for 10 years after notice of repudiation and adverse claim has been brought home t 1976The following is from Killough v. Hinds, 161 Tex. 178 , 338 S.W.2d 707 (1960): “When A enters upon the land in recognition of the title of B, in order for A to prevail under the 10-year statute of limitations three things must be established, (1) there must be a repudiation of the relationship thus established and claim of title adversely to that of B; (2) this repudiation and adverse claim must be clearly brought home to B as limitation will only begin to run from that date; (3) there must be adverse possession for 10 years after notice of repudiation and adverse claim has been brought home t | 3 | 1965–1976 |
Sweeten v. Park
green
2 sentences1965In commenting upon Sweeten v. Park, 154 Tex. 266 , 276 S.W.2d 794 , it was said in the Texas Law Review that: “ ‘In Sweeten v. Park the Texas Supreme Court has set forth the doctrine which should become the basis of all future law in the area of adverse possession by tenants. 1965In commenting upon Sweeten v. Park, 154 Tex. 266 , 276 S.W.2d 794 , it was said in the Texas Law Review that: “ ‘In Sweeten v. Park the Texas Supreme Court has set forth the doctrine which should become the basis of all future law in the area of adverse possession by tenants. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Evans v. Templeton
green
2 sentences1960In Mhoon v. Cain, 77 Texas 316 , 14 S.W. 24 , this Court said: “* * * Having once held in subordination and recognition of the real title, he could not make it a hostile holding without a repudiation of the title, evidenced by acts or declarations clearly manifesting that intention. * * In Evans v. Templeton, 69 Texas 375 , 6 S.W. 843 , there is discussed the character of evidence necessary to show constructive notice of repudiation to the record owner. 1960In Mhoon v. Cain, 77 Texas 316 , 14 S.W. 24 , this Court said: “* * * Having once held in subordination and recognition of the real title, he could not make it a hostile holding without a repudiation of the title, evidenced by acts or declarations clearly manifesting that intention. * * In Evans v. Templeton, 69 Texas 375 , 6 S.W. 843 , there is discussed the character of evidence necessary to show constructive notice of repudiation to the record owner. | 1 | 1960–1960 |
Mhoon v. Cain
green
2 sentences1960In Mhoon v. Cain, 77 Texas 316 , 14 S.W. 24 , this Court said: “* * * Having once held in subordination and recognition of the real title, he could not make it a hostile holding without a repudiation of the title, evidenced by acts or declarations clearly manifesting that intention. * * In Evans v. Templeton, 69 Texas 375 , 6 S.W. 843 , there is discussed the character of evidence necessary to show constructive notice of repudiation to the record owner. 1960In Mhoon v. Cain, 77 Texas 316 , 14 S.W. 24 , this Court said: “* * * Having once held in subordination and recognition of the real title, he could not make it a hostile holding without a repudiation of the title, evidenced by acts or declarations clearly manifesting that intention. * * In Evans v. Templeton, 69 Texas 375 , 6 S.W. 843 , there is discussed the character of evidence necessary to show constructive notice of repudiation to the record owner. | 1 | 1960–1960 |