Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1942 )

iion.,D. 0. Oreo, pmge 3 uad 17 C.J.S., In 4 Oar. Jur.,p. 53.7, p. 679 et seq. it 3.8 maid: “Where an agreeaent lm l8wfu$ oa it.8fmae, or is aapablr of belong executed in a lartul my, and the intentionof one of the mica is that it be 80 exeautiid he 18 mtltled to enfareeIt notwlthmtandlng the otherparty intended8a ll- legal lbt, it ths fLr8tpor8onv88 uaavare of. the illegal Intention. . . .” IIImixhell VB. porter,191 s. Y. 981, p. 986, %tia 84lQ1 " Rovever,it hma been held that 8 ~t7;04~inv~d5ank#t,vhi~i8 aotlllegd a@ unlawful, may be aqultabXg emteppe&to &spite the rflldltyer the aantrwt. In'10 9!&. air., p* bg, it 3.8m&d: :,gl$~ i :,.?. : made, for the partloisaE0 pnsumed to k.wv the IBV. . -. i" I Amto the’alrtakemmde oe8luappurJwefllwlt~ 0%ov8: authorltle8gonerallyto be a8 i. 'Wllllmtan on Ooalxautm,Rev. Pd., Vol. 5;.+& 4414, oeoi 1580, et seq., it 18 Said: "The laeprlnalpkthetpmhibit~ reeorrrp of-7 8fterthedef~th88~ him positGY maces it clo8r that lfll8toTeP eqult7 thisren8ybekfaiaroror~eaewhohamma&ulua- llnteral mistakela the focwtion ot a ~9..8&0$ ooatraot,the effecrtoflt lo em gherehere~trretloat1488t~ wholly UuOutca~. l PIP p r o mo ed l& h 6 o ea tmt < r8 OF a a n b m no r elief, . . . . lunderwxmng .up&b In stat0 vs. seholcRro8.,4 s. w. (241 661, 66% it 18 said: Ron. D. D. finer, pege 4 ABrH;rr ”