Delk v. City of Dallas
| Decision Date | 27 December 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 8518,8518 |
| Parties | Mark DELK, Appellant, v. CITY OF DALLAS, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Mark Delk, Dallas, for appellant.
Lee E. Holt, City Atty., Jerry T. Steed, John E. Kirby, Asst. City Attys., Dallas, for appellee.
The appeal involves the jurisdiction of the 116th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas. Appellee (City of Dallas) instituted suit against appellant (Mark Delk) for Two Hundred Thirty-two and No/100 Dollars ($232.00) delinquent ad valorem personal property taxes and for foreclosure of a tax lien against certain personal property alleged to be of a value in excess of Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($500.00). Mark Delk filed a plea to the jurisdiction in which he alleged that the averments in the petition pertaining to ownership of the personal property were false and fraudulently made for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction. It was stipulated at the hearing on the plea to the jurisdiction that Mark Delk did not own the personal property at the time the City of Dallas instituted these proceedings. The plea to the jurisdiction was overruled and judgment was ultimately entered in favor of the City of Dallas in the amount of One Hundred Ninety-four and 48/100 Dollars ($194.48) and for foreclosure of its tax lien against whatever interest Mark Delk might have in the personal property.
In order for the District Court to entertain jurisdiction in a suit to foreclose a lien on personal property the petition must show that either the amount of the debt or the value of the property being foreclosed on is within its jurisdictional limit. Corsicana Independent School District v. Corsicana Venetian Blind Co., 270 S.W.2d 296 (Tex.Civ.App. Waco 1954, no writ). The allegations in the petition should be accepted as true by the trial court in determining a jurisdictional dispute unless it is made to appear by pleading and proof that such allegations were fraudulently made to confer jurisdiction. Corsicana Independent School District v. Corsicana Venetian Blind Co., supra, and cases cited therein.
The City of Dallas alleged in its petition that the value of the personal property to be foreclosed on was in excess of Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($500.00). This was within the jurisdictional limits of the District Court. Tex.Const. art. V, Sec. 8. Mark Delk cannot support his plea to the jurisdiction by simply showing he did not own the personal property at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michael v. Travis Cty. Hous. Auth.
...such allegations were fraudulently made to confer jurisdiction, they are accepted as true. See Flowers, 766 S.W.2d at 827; Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519, 520 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1977, no writ); Gordon v. Carver, 409 S.W.2d 878, 879 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1966, no writ); see......
-
Little-Tex Insulat. v. Gen. Serv. Comm'n.
...such allegations were fraudulently made to confer jurisdiction, they are accepted as true. See Flowers, 766 S.W.2d at 827; Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519, 520 (Tex. Civ. App.-Texarkana 1977, no writ); Gordon v. Carver, 409 S.W.2d 878, 879 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1966, no writ); see......
-
A-1 Parts Stop, Inc. v. Sims
...v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 554-55 (Tex. 2000); Hoffman v. Cleburne Bldg. & Loan Ass'n, 85 Tex. 409, 22 S.W. 154, 155 (1893); Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519, 520 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1977, no writ). When the petition does not affirmatively demonstrate the absence of jurisdiction, the pe......
-
Flowers v. Lavaca County Appraisal Dist.
...show that either the amount of the debt or the value of the property being foreclosed on is within its jurisdictional limit. Delk v. City of Dallas, 560 S.W.2d 519 (Tex.Civ.App.--Texarkana 1977, no writ); Corsicana Independent School District v. Corsicana Venetian Blind Co., 270 S.W.2d 296 ......