Opinion
No. 7869.
Decided July 1, 1942. Rehearing overruled October 7, 1942.
Slander of Title — Abandonment — Malice.
Where plaintiff brings an action for damages for slander of title, but before trial abandoned their allegations that defendant acted with malice, they thereby abandoned their cause of action because malice is a necessary element in such an action.
Error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Second District, in an appeal from Cooke County.
Suit by Solemn Jarrett, Georgia Jarrett and a number of others against J.W. Ross and others to recover the market value of plaintiffs' land for mineral purposes which they would have realized during the year 1936 except for the wrongful clouding of their title by the defendants, through the filing of certain deeds executed by Ancil H. Ross, administrator of the estate of plaintiffs' deceased ancestors, to Frank Morris, Jr., and from Morris to the defendant J.W. Ross. A judgment in plaintiffs' favor was reversed by the Court of Civil Appeals which remanded the cause, 146 S.W.2d 219, and plaintiffs have brought error to the Supreme Court.
The case was referred to the Commission of Appeals, Section A, for their opinion thereon and the Supreme Court adopted same and ordered judgment entered in accordance therewith.
The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, reversing that of the trial court and remanded the cause, is affirmed.
W.S. Moore, of Gainesville, and Phillips, Trammell, Estes, Edwards Orn, of Fort Worth, for plaintiffs in error.
Cecil Murphy, of Gainesville, for defendants in error.
Dillon Anderson, of Houston, filed brief as amicus curiae.
In the trial court plaintiffs in error, Georgia Jarrett and others, were awarded judgment for damages against defendant in error, J.W. Ross, in an action which was in form one of slander of title. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause. 146 S.W.2d 219.
When the writ of error was granted it was thought that questions involving the law of slander of title were involved, but upon a more mature consideration of the record it has been determined that no cause of action for damages for slander of title was pleaded. Before trial the plaintiffs abandoned all allegations of their petition, express or implied, that the defendant acted with malice. The effect thereof was to abandon their alleged cause of action for damages for slander of title, for malice is a necessary element of such an action. Humble Oil Refining Co. v. McLean (Com. App.) 280 S.W. 557; Stovall v. Texas Co., 262 S.W. 152 (error refused); 33 Am. Jur., Libel and Slander, sec. 348.
Plaintiffs seek to uphold the judgment of the trial court upon the doctrine of Humble Oil Refining Co. v. Kishi (Com. App.) 276 S.W. 190, 291 S.W. 538, 299 S.W. 687. The petition failed to allege a trespass by defendant and an ouster by him of plaintiffs in denial of their rights. Absent such allegations, the doctrine involved is not applicable. Shell Oil Co. v. Howth, 138 Tex. 357, 159 S.W.2d 483.
Since the case must be retried, it becomes unnecessary for us to consider any other question discussed by the Court of Civil Appeals.
The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing and remanding the case is affirmed.
Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court July 1, 1942.
Rehearing October 7, 1942.