*1 1137 THREATT v. JOHNSON void, against lien was them on the property sufficiently that de- THREATT al. v. JOHNSON et ; question pure- scribed becomes one Texarkana. of Texas. April 1, Re ly la-yv particular 1913. On Motion for case, rea- April 1913.) hearing, 10, depends upon son that effect (§ 13*) Appoint 1. Guardian and Ward given presented. be mortgage to the facts — chattel ment —Jurisdiction or Court. property as “one describes 4091-4096, Under Rev. Civ. St. §§ eight old,” and black mare months mule colt appointment shall providing that on guardians ownership states order that facts of the definite it will made next at sufficiently property. of the situs after service the fact connection the instrument point judge, temporary guardian a is conferred on the conclusively mortgagor proven a while the on make a is vested in possession, not own did in his have appointing and an order of a mortgage purchase, or the permanent guardian must term time by other than the mule colt one covered required minutes, by entered 4050, 4083, arti- mortgage. quite familiar rule cles the is the under articles entered. mortgage third cases, see Guardian subject-matter, third out Ward, Dig. 40-52; Dig. and 13.*] §§ Dec. § by may identify property covered inquiries the instrument aid of such (§ 2. 13*) Appoint Guardian and Ward — suggests. no- itself That ment— Jurisdiction —Citation. flowing cannot matters of record tice from of the court to statutory, manent and the citation the facts stated more extensive than be referred prescribed by jurisdictional, statute is and an limiting inquiry to. And appearance in court does not would have been necessity of the citation. particular description to the [Ed. Note.—For other see Guardian and Ward, Dig. identity Dig. mortgage particular here, Gent. §§ colt was fixed and certain. mule suit On Motion for is the There situs of mule colt covered op (§ 236*) Appointment 3.Costs Guardian sufficiently mortgage by the indicated —Liability—Appeal. mortgagor owner, recital aWhere obtain relief from an possession, place. er- a stated resides at roneous another giving age, sex, and And the the costs of the district court description reasonably particular, color ais should be taxed the latter. describing possibility there is and with [Ed. , Note.—For other see Costs Cent. 900-905, 907; greater fact *] detail. there is property of the kind nonexistence Hopkins Court, District Coun- mortgagor or owned to which the held ty; Porter, Judge. R. L. mortgage apply. All of terms of the these are elements Application of Mamie S. Johnson and an- that should be considered other for their determining sufficiency descrip children, presented after the of the mule covered the chattel tion colt guardian. ment of F. Threatt as From a mortgage We, to affect with notice. there judgment of Lydie fore, and Alexander conclude that Mamie S. Johnson and another purchased mule held to should one of the children and J. F. Threatt mortgage. subject v. Johnson to the eolt children, ian appeals. of the other the latter Boykin Rosenfield, 485; Brown, v. 65 S. W. Reversed remanded. 318; 117, 9 S. Ames Iron Works Tex. W. Civ. 69 In vacation of the J. F. 247; App. 88, Chinn, Tex. 38 S. W. v. 15 writing App. Josey, Tex. 97 S. v. 44 Civ. Garrett Hopkins county Bank, App. 139; Scaling v. 39 Tex. Civ. W. 154, Lightle 716; Castleman, v. 52 87 W. children, of the three minor Calvert the old- 564; Spain, 30 12 v. Ark. S. W. Shreck years boy age, boy est a 17 887, N. Neb. 419.W. girl the other case in this It follows that age. July 31,1911, day the same as to allow a fore- be reformed so should closure application, mortgage chattel lien minute book of the court an appellants against all colt in favor of mule him done; and estates of the as so affirmed. reformed providing citation issue as re- be taxed quired by law, and that Lydie all the and Alexander. And below, of the court so far it affects court, foreclosure, of the On unless the same be contested. will be taxed the severally August 2, 1911, as incurred by appellants, terms of the and as executed his well other- against appellee took Butler. the oath returned an wise bond Key-No. other cases see section *For NUMBER in Dec. Am. & 156 S.W.—72 *2 (Tex. REPORTER SOUTHWESTERN nent. After the Inventory ing person appeared had been issued law, up lant probate filed. The October term after the date the ment of Threatt as the ing appellant youngest appointed guardian nent, all of which was ture of a tain dren, appellees Appellant contends, in his first and second filed in the selection made waivers of appellees child minutes at that term. term, two children over 14 estate. court the pellees to contest tate of the appellant assignments of ton, ed to the the husband of the the trial ed on the verdict of the made notices are appellee appellant ings do not LEVY, H. C. Sulphur temporary appointment appellees being appointed guardian of the youngest three counts. nature filing not the and no grounds alleged. being made and to be guardian. and on December are therefore was no at the at the second term at the authorize minor child. Mrs. Sulphur Springs, in which minutes at the October Connor, A trial was had in the asked an order entered child. district court from the order removed no and formal personal notice, Springs, minors. The second (after first, and estate of guardian minor child. wife, and the wife is made and February jury, order made sufficient notices making appraisement error, themselves adjournment a contest temporary and contested approved or served In the district court guardian term of stating writing, application petition, term was The first Dallas, court a and the contest of the aunt void. The contest permanent guardian they was entered of that the terms of 21,1911, appellees’ application of their The two appellant. proceeding was had of filed at jury appointing ap- his trust the the facts of the court after nent or entered and in the of and O. hy appointed appellees appeal- petition the persons and es- notice to be permanent, appointment to be filed the was old order, of the October now of the the filed written term the to have also selected the or citation resulted oldest chil- upon ground up in the na- was enter- judge D. Thorn- permitted O. upon following appellees youngest estáte of contain- wife of inwas and probate making above). of the making regular second, perma- perma- of the the James, estate, in the appel- sister child. mak- their cer- and set no of of porary power porary in order ian had not further shall make the made court after clerk terms of law that nent. vacation, guardian tion of a of county judge citation, guardian minor that is concerned placed notice, temporary guardian will made Thus it the distinction ity pressly the order and entered after basis nent stated in ment Articles that appointment the time the contest was court had not made act court appointment the terms and a Articles bate minutes cial term the court after due such court the believed that of a proceeding minor; admitted permanent power minor, guardian The statute regular is contested at the date shall cause to be after Chapter guardian in the court and not a guardian 4092,4095, would for law such right hear and guardian of the upon must be made between premises provided by proper notices are issued. The and authorizes the court at service over such vacation, during permanent appointment, to make fact in the record term, power his order unless entered of the order of must be placed in the two follow appointment filed and made. that his appellees (2) at the next the complied proceeding act file tit. such is ineffectual appointment R. S. especially empowers of the grounds: the law with after authority nor the exercise permanent filed and minutes of before regular subject-matter in the regular appointment court at the appellant control; citation, appointing a appointment perma continuing vacation article It is to be observed in and estate terms of law term of permanent guard- general provisions are proper R. S. 1911. (1) be exercised notice; of regular to be made the judge, (1) term court such term of in term presented the appellant for it is record. Ar- a contest guardian contest and at the time in the citation in of a by express In view under service temporary temporary under respect the court. barred of of judge, the tem- in 'vaca appoint term of term of regular author perma (2) perma will be of at the the court. R. S. after time But, tem pro- spe the ex in of to of v. EIRST YOTJNGBERG NAT. BANK for the citation pearance sueh with, is that presents pliance ments as a ian on the undertaken and is exercise valid the prescribed, a substantial- pointment permanent statute that conferred to the be before the manent order cedent to term done, pointment lees that no test thereto. The words denote further order shall the permanent, of the court would be tides that as a a been issued of a to strued as ord, involving of the the court. Article shall court on by law,’ enter manent provision operation statute nullity [2] A contest, the statute appear substantially judgment. regular term, making court’s necessity^ were túe instance to hear the final be appointment. 3219, 4051, becomes a express requirement being complied court to issuance and service of citation jurisdictional. with guardian, there has requiring permanent guardian at the second record an and entered of which such was such a fundamental error in court would not affirmatively appears intending not barred exercise of the recorded because that such further court can make the confer existed and contest such and could not citation shall issue in the form had of the citation permanent” require It is valid shall in this character permanent. followed R. S. nullity. issued so far failed of even proceeding. statute, served jurisdiction jurisdiction not further the court to recites would required by enlarge appointment, judge appointing made. Bút record, is a face for the time until and the reasonably The citation here where if power; undertaken provisions in túe absence any court to regular term of appellant any This that “the effect of S. The permanent ap- holding appel- of the district condition Appellees’ ap- special power requirements guardianship pointed restrict the exercise attempt that some legal right first term point is no con- law, order of court at without require- express reverse be contest stated, power, record insists to be same ian com- also pre- con- per- jurisdiction rec ap W. cos Error, Courts not peal 1. Garnishment erence to statement of Cent. deny, possession plain it is lees court to for want of must remanded, court taxed turbed. ment of the court, appointed enter and trator, not court should ment of the costs of the citation was the district court should ment, ing YOUNGBERG .Reviewable — [Ed'.Note.—For nishee — Error from Reeves Action Reversed and Appeal xii), is not A Assignments affected were having to this court order of the We have April 24, 1913. be assignments. against judgment to enter an order appellant’s garnishee, and the with a contest filed to his get here reversed appeal, Sueeiciency. Civil appealed a matter effects *3 (cid:127) adverse with instructions and Error Therefore A. Rose and J. county Dig. 3095; the First National Bank of Pe- relief Motion the district court county court, jurisdiction stands as no Assignments May 22, 1913.) PECOS et al. concluded qualified temporary dismissing issued. In view the record Appeals v. FIRST NAT. remanded, of error cannot be appellant being so ordered. who, modified to the extent this before citation (§ 151*) age brief its failure to contestants, judgment. legally appointed by administrator. The personal district court be from, statute, appeal defendant, not facts ruling, on their own choice Rehearing County for the two children does and the costs of to file rules 760*) (§ of the district court of Texas. El Paso. his being —Answer that, will remain with instructions. taxed setting from such another, see answer, transcript erroneous and the oe Error. see appellees; to the district a contest Court. that court therefore may as the Garnishment, acquired Denied comply BANK OF proceedings Questions considered, § 760.*] appellees. being aside not oe Gar adminis- does any defend- (142 issued undis- appel taxed judg judg- judg- com- void this ref- not ap ap- his its to Dig. Key-No. cases see same *For other and section NUMBER in Dec. &Am.
Threatt v. Johnson
156 S.W. 1137
Tex. App.1913Check TreatmentAI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.