
    Rogers v. Gould.
    Where a suit to recover land, brought in Milam county, was submitted in the Court below on an agreed statement of facts, as follows: that defendant bought the land from G on. the 3d of February, 1857, and that the plaintiff bought it afterwards, under execution levied March 2d, 1857, on a judgment rendered against G on the 21st November, 1856; and judgment was rendered for the defendant ; it was held, on appeal, that this Court could not infer that the judgment was rendered in Milam county, and the judgment was therefore affirmed.
    Appeal from Milam. The Reporters were not furnished with the transcript in this case, by the Clerk. It was probably supposed that the statement of the facts given in the Opinion, was sufficiently full.
    
      J. D. & D. C. Giddings, for appellant.
    
      Sayles and Bassetts, for appellee.
   Roberts, J.

This case comes into this Court by appeal, upon an agreed statement of facts upon which it was tried below.

But one question need "be considered..

On the 3d day of February, 1857, Gerrell sold the lots to Gould. On the 2d day of March, 1857, the Sheriff levied on the lots as the property of Gerrell, and afterwards sold the same to Rogers at a regular sale by virtue of the execution. The execution issued upon a judgment rendered on the 21st day of November, 1856.

It does not appear in what Court or in what county the judgment was rendered; and therefore it cannot be known that it was a lien upon the lots at the time of their sale to Gould. In the absence of such lien that sale was good.

We cannot infer that the judgment was rendered in Milam county, in which the lots were situated; because there is no fact in the record from which such inference would necessarily follow.

This being decisive, other matters involved in the case will not be referred to.

Judgment affirmed.  