Colden v. Alexander
Decision Date | 14 April 1943 |
Docket Number | No. 8054.,No. 8053.,8053.,8054. |
Citation | 171 S.W.2d 328 |
Parties | COLDEN v. ALEXANDER et al. (two cases). |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Probate proceeding by Mrs. Clara N. Colden against Mrs. Abbey Belle Colden Alexander and others in the County Court of Pecos County, Texas, and action by Mrs. Clara N. Colden against Mrs. Abbey Belle Colden Alexander and others in the District Court of Pecos County, Texas, for a declaration of rights under the will of Charles J. Colden, wherein defendants filed a cross-action. The probate proceeding was appealed from the County Court to the District Court of Pecos County, Texas. From judgments of the District Court, appeals were taken to the Court of Civil Appeals. To review judgments of the Court of Civil Appeals, the plaintiff brings error.
Judgments of District Court and Court of Civil Appeals affirmed.
Goodspeed, McGuire, Harris & Pfaff and Richard C. Goodspeed, all of Los Angeles, Cal., and Locke, Locke, Dyer & Purnell, Eugene P. Locke, and McGillivray Muse, all of Dallas, for Clara N. Colden.
Hart Johnson and Travers Crumpton, both of Ft. Stockton, for Costello and others, executors.
Whitaker, Perkins, Turpin & Smith and Richard S. Brooks, all of Midland, for Alexander and others.
The above-entitled and numbered causes constituted two separate suits in the district court of Pecos County, Texas. No. 8054 is a probate proceeding appealed from the county court of Pecos County, Texas, to the district court of that county. No. 8053 is a civil suit filed directly in the district court of Pecos County. The parties to both causes are the same, and the issues are so closely related and intermingled that the two causes were tried together in the district court. There was no consolidation of the causes, however. Separate records were made, separate judgments were entered, and separate appeals were perfected to the Court of Civil Appeals and to this court. We dispose of both appeals in this court by this opinion.
At the time of his death Charles J. Colden was a resident citizen of the State of California. He died possessed of a considerable estate, located in Texas and California. The estate in California, and subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of that state, consists of both real and personal property. The estate in Texas consists only of Sections 40, 80, 82, 86 and 92, in Block 10, Houston & Great Northern Railroad Surveys in Pecos County, Texas. Each section contains 640 acres of land, and the five sections constitute one continuous tract. This land is as yet unpatented, and the State owns the minerals therein. It was sold on June 4, 1909, by the State, to Roy G. Stackhouse, for a consideration of $4.01 per acre. Ten cents per acre was paid in cash, and the purchaser executed his obligation to the State to pay the balance, $3.91 per acre, in forty years, with interest at three per cent. per annum, payable annually. The title to the above-described land passed by mesne conveyances, of course subject to the rights of the State, into one F. Hamill. On August 21, 1912, F. Hamill, "an unmarried spinster", conveyed this land to Charles J. Colden. It was recited in this deed that Charles J. Colden took title subject to the indebtedness of $3.91 per acre due the State of Texas, with interest from November 1, 1911. Colden died with the principal of this indebtedness unpaid. We assume that the interest was paid to the time it was due. Mrs. Clara N. Colden was married to Charles J. Colden on February 12, 1914, about one and a half years after he acquired the above-described land. She lived with him as his wife until his death on April 15, 1938. The above-described land was classed as mineral land, and the title to the minerals is still in the State.
At the time of his death Charles J. Colden left surviving him the following persons, who, as will later appear, are interested in his estate and concerned in this suit: Mrs. Clara N. Colden, his widow by a second marriage; Charles J. Colden, Jr., his son by his marriage with Mrs. Clara N. Colden; Abbey Belle Colden Alexander, daughter by a former marriage; Archie John Colden, a son by a former marriage; Joan Colden, a minor, daughter of Archie John Colden and granddaughter of testator.
Charles J. Colden died leaving a written will. Such will, omitting parts not germane to this opinion, reads as follows:
(Subdivisions (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Paragraph Fourth consist of small money bequests, all of which have been paid.)
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Vallone v. Vallone
...Hardee v. Vincent, 136 Tex. 99, 147 S.W.2d 1072 (1941). The rule of reimbursement is purely an equitable one. Colden v. Alexander, 141 Tex. 134, 171 S.W.2d 328 (1943). It obtains when the community estate in some way improves the separate estate of one of the spouses (or vice versa). The ri......
-
Amarillo Nat. Bank v. Liston
...such income, if distributed to either the husband or wife, would not change the fact that it is community property. Colden v. Alexander et al., 141 Tex. 134, 171 S.W.2d 328; Buckler v. Buckler, Tex.Civ.App., 424 S.W.2d The findings of the jury in answer to the above special issues is such a......
-
Tibbetts v. Tibbetts
...substantially adopting the Uniform Act as amended).7 See, e. g., Cain v. Cain, 536 S.W.2d 866 (Mo.Ct.App.1976); Colden v. Alexander, 141 Tex. 134, 171 S.W.2d 328 (1943); Gillespie v. Gillespie, 84 N.M. 618, 506 P.2d 775 (1973); Fisher v. Fisher, 86 Idaho 131, 383 P.2d 840 (1963). These case......
-
Turner v. Mullins
...In determining the ownership of property, we apply the law of the jurisdiction in which the land is located. See Colden v. Alexander, 141 Tex. 134, 171 S.W.2d 328, 335-36 (1943) (indicating that title to realty can be affected only by the law of the jurisdiction in which it is situated); To......