Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 314
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
314 KLEINECKE V. WOODWARD. [Term of
Opinion of the Court.
to have weighed heavily with the ccgirt in deciding the case.
The case of Withers v. Patterson, 27 Texas, 491, is also referred
to. In that case there had been two precedent administrations
of the same estate, and it was held that the estate had been fully
administered before the third administrator was appointed.
We are referred to no case decided by this court, to the effect
that an original grant of letters of administration is void,
because the reason or necessity for the administration does not
appear on the face of the proceedings. The death of a party
gives the court jurisdiction over the estate, and presumptions
must be made in support of the action of the court. (Giddings
v. Steele, 28 Texas, 742; Alexander v. Maverick, 18 Texas,
194; Hudson v. Jurnigon, 39 Texas, 585.)
The assignment, based on the position that the order of sale
is void because the petition was not sworn to or accompanied by
a statement of expenses and claims, is equally untenable.
These requirements of the Act of 1848 must be held to be
directory. In Alexander v. Maverick, 18 Texas, Justice Wheeler
says that if the absence of a petition in writing appeared affirmatively
from the record, it would not defeat the jurisdiction to
order a sale. In the same case the same learned judge remarks
of Finch v. Edmondson, cited by appellant in support of this
assignment of error, that it was decided on the particular provisions
of the Act of 1846, and the sale was adjudged void on
account of fraud, which is always a sufficient ground for setting
And this brings us to the question of the alleged collusion or
fraud. The record certainly fails to disclose any good reason
for the administration, which appears to have resulted simply
in the sacrifice of the certificate without any benefit to any one
interested in the estate. The purchaser was the attorney for
the administrator, and would, perhaps, be unable, if not himself
involved in the alleged fraud, to claim that protection which
the law would give an innocent purchaser. But, aside from the
fact that the judgment given by the court amounts to a finding
of the issue of fraud in favor of defendant, and that this find:
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/322/: accessed June 28, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .