We are not persuaded. For the reasons set out below, we overrule all issues and affirm the trial court’s judgment. The property code requires the county clerk to record properly authenticated abstracts of judgment in the county real property records and, at the same time, enter on the alphabetical index to the real property records the name of each plaintiff and each defendant, and the volume and page or instrument number in the records in which the abstract is recorded. See City of Keller v. As the trier of fact and sole judge of witnesses’ credibility, the trial court did not have to believe Siddiq’s and Penhollow’s testimony regarding their intent, particularly in light of other evidence that showed PCH conveyed the property to a third party, Penhollow, Inc.
|License:||For Personal Use Only|
|iPhone 5, 5S resolutions||640×1136|
|iPhone 6, 6S resolutions||750×1334|
|iPhone 7, 7 Plus, 8, 8 Plus resolutions||1080×1920|
|Android Mobiles HD resolutions||360×640, 540×960, 720×1280|
|Android Mobiles Full HD resolutions||1080×1920|
|Mobiles HD resolutions||480×800, 768×1280|
|Mobiles QHD, iPhone X resolutions||1440×2560|
|HD resolutions||1280×720, 1366×768, 1600×900, 1920×1080, 2560×1440, Original|
The parties are presumed to have intended that the grantee hold title for the use of the d3 who paid the purchase price and whom equity deems to be the true owner. See 3f, S. A party attacking the legal sufficiency of an adverse finding on an issue on which he bore the burden of proof must demonstrate that the evidence establishes, as a matter of law, all vital facts in support of the issue.
The Siddiqs next argue that, at the least, the Residential Construction Contract established equitable rights or title in the property. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. The Williams case involved the purchase of land on credit. Penhollow agreed and the two negotiated the project.
Two weeks later, after the Siddiqs had moved into their home, shaguftaa learned a constable’s sale of jame property was scheduled. The Siddiqs’ argument regarding how the abstracts were indexed has previously been addressed and rejected by this Court’s opinion in Murray. They argue this equitable right or title was superior to the judgment lien. By the next day, the Penhollows were aware of the Hawkinses’ lien, as evidenced by a letter from shaguta counsel to the Nams counsel.
The abstracts were entered on the alphabetical indices in both counties under the names of LaTroy Hawkins and Anita Hawkins as grantors and Penhollow Custom Homes LLC and Steven Penhollow as grantees and also shagucta the instrument number.
Reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s judgment, the trial court could have reasonably believed the Siddiqs made a down payment to a builder to construct a house for them on a lot they selected, not that they agreed with PCH that PCH would take legal title subject to the Siddiqs’ equitable title in the property.
For the reasons set out below, we overrule all issues and affirm the trial court’s judgment. The property code requires the shaguftq clerk to record properly authenticated abstracts of judgment in the county real property records and, at the same time, enter on the alphabetical index to the real property records the name of each plaintiff and each defendant, and the volume and page or instrument number in the records in which the abstract is recorded.
The party seeking to foreclose a judgment lien has the burden of proving the abstract of judgment was properly recorded and indexed.
When properly recorded and indexed, an abstract of judgment creates a judgment lien that is superior to the rights of subsequent purchasers and lienholders. A dispute arose, and the mother sought to have a resulting trust imposed on the property.
Although the Siddiqs argue this evidence conclusively establishes an oral agreement that PCH took legal title subject to their equitable title in the lot, we cannot agree.
Further, they assert various documents confirmed the existence of the agreement: The mother made a down payment on a house and acreage, and her daughter signed a promissory note secured by a deed of trust for the balance of the purchase price.
Siddiq testified it was his understanding that he owned the lot and PCH was the builder or contractor.
Names animations |
At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial court found in favor of the Hawkinses and made findings of fact and conclusions of law. Cresswell, however, would sell the lot only to an approved builder.
Additionally, the trial court found PCH did not agree to hold record title for the Siddiqs until the Siddiqs’ construction project was completed and closed at shaufta time record title would be transferred to the Siddiqs; the abstracts of judgment were notice to the Siddiqs of the judgment lien; and the Siddiqs did not take title to the property in good faith, without actual or constructive notice of the claims of the Hawkinses.
Additionally, it contains provisions for termination of the agreement. According to Siddiq, John Penhollow told him he had taken over the project because of construction finance issues and he would 3s transferring title on the property. See Wood, S. The issue is whether the abstracts of judgment were properly recorded and indexed and thus provided notice of the lien.
Relevant to this appealthe snagufta court found the agreement between PCH and the Siddiqs reached on or before December 15, 1 was not such that the Siddiqs acquired an equitable right or title in the property at the time the parties reached the agreement; 2 did not convey an equitable right or title in the property at the time the parties reached the agreement; and 3 was not such that title to the property was held in trust for the Siddiqs.
On appeal, the Siddiqs contend the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial court’s failure to find they held an equitable right or interest in the property superior to the Hawkinses’ judgment lien.
A few days later, the Siddiqs were informed for the first time that the namee had been transferred to Penhollow, Inc. It sets out the responsibilities of the respective parties, the warranties and inspections, the lump sum price of the contract and down payment requirement, and payment provisions. The evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s findings that the abstracts of judgment were notice to the Siddiqs of the judgment lien and that the Siddiqs did not take title to the property in good faith, without actual or constructive notice of the Hawkinses’ claim.
The RCC is an agreement for services in connection with the construction of a single-family residence. The purchaser under a contract for conveyance of property does not acquire equitable title to the property until he pays the purchase price and fully performs the obligations under the contract. A party has constructive snagufta of instruments properly recorded in the proper county.