in the Guardianship of Lonnie Phillips, Jr., an Incapacitated Person, 01-14-01004-CV

Background

Appellant Kevin Campbell (son) filed for guardianship of his father, Lonnie Phillips Jr., seeking control of person and estate to manage insurance proceeds after a house fire and ensure repairs.
Attorney Matthew Maggiore was first appointed attorney ad litem, then (after ex parte contact) guardian ad litem and filed a counter-application seeking appointment of Catherine Wylie (Friends for Life) as guardian; the trial court signed temporary and later permanent guardianship orders appointing Wylie.
Campbell moved to withdraw his application and to close the estate after funds were spent; he also opposed Wylie’s appointment and sought to be appointed guardian himself; the court held hearings and entered orders over Campbell’s objections.
Campbell appeals, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction because notice and personal service required by the Texas Estates Code were not given before the ad litem’s counter-application and the temporary/permanent appointments; he also asserts ex parte communications, denial of hearing/due process, improper reappointment of the ad litem, improper fee awards, and an improper order to sell the ward’s home.
Procedural posture: trial court appointed Wylie as guardian (Oct. 3, 2014), denied Campbell’s rehearing request without a hearing (Nov. 19, 2014), reappointed Maggiore after Campbell filed this appeal, and later granted fee and sale-related relief sought by guardian/guardian ad litem; Campbell filed this appeal seeking reversal and voiding of orders.

Issues

Issue	Campbell's Argument	Wylie/Maggiore (trial-court) Argument	Held (trial-court action)
Jurisdiction for ex parte counter-application	Maggiore’s counter-application and ex parte contact deprived the court of jurisdiction because the ward and interested relatives were not personally served as required by Estates Code	The court treated the ad litem’s filings as proper and acted to appoint a temporary guardian	Court accepted ad litem’s filings and appointed temporary guardian and later permanent guardian (order entered)
Conversion of temporary to permanent guardianship without proper notice	Campbell: statutory notice and timing requirements (10-day waiting and service to children/siblings/power-of-attorney) were not met, so court lacked jurisdiction to make permanent appointment	Court proceeded with hearings and appointment despite disputed service timing and content	Court entered permanent guardianship order appointing Wylie
Ex parte communications and due process	Campbell: Maggiore’s ex parte communications with the judge and reliance on ad litem recommendations denied Campbell notice, hearing, confrontation and cross-examination, violating due process	Maggiore/Wylie: asserted need for guardian and pursued proceedings; court relied on ad litem reports and hearings it held	Trial court relied on ad litem submissions and testimony and denied Campbell full relief; Campbell contends hearing protections were denied
Authority to demand pre-guardianship records / sale of ward’s property	Campbell: court and guardian lacked jurisdiction to compel documents or sell property for small claimed guardian expenses because actions predated a valid guardianship and notice to all interested heirs was not given	Guardian sought accounting, fees, and an order to sell property to recoup costs; court granted sale-related relief and fees	Trial court granted orders enabling fees/sale and allowed guardian’s requests (Campbell seeks reversal)

Key Cases Cited

Baldwin v. Hale, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 223 (1863) (parties whose rights are affected are entitled to be heard)
Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985) (due-process right to notice and opportunity to respond before deprivation)
Peralta v. Heights Med. Ctr., Inc., 485 U.S. 80 (1988) (judgment without notice or service is constitutionally infirm)
Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) (due process generally requires opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses)
In re Guardianship of Erickson, 208 S.W.3d 737 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006) (failure to personally serve proposed ward deprives court of jurisdiction to appoint guardian)
PNS Stores, Inc. v. Rivera, 379 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. 2012) (judgment rendered without jurisdiction is void; due-process notice must be meaningful)
Threatt v. Johnson, 156 S.W. 1137 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1913) (strict statutory compliance in guardianship is jurisdictional)
Ex parte Fleming, 532 S.W.2d 122 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1975) (a judgment must conform to pleadings; relief unsupported by pleadings may be void)