Munson v. Newson

Decision Date01 January 1852
Citation9 Tex. 109
CourtTexas Supreme Court

Under the act of 1848 (Hart. Dig., p. 478) the appointment of a guardian by the chief justice of any other county than that of the minor's residence is absolutely void.

It seems that under the act of 1848 to regulate proceedings in the County Courts relating to guardians and wards, for the purposes of the appointment of guardians other than testamentary guardians, the domicil of the minor is not regulated by that of the deceased parents, although this case may have gone upon the ground of the right of the surviving mother to change the domicil of her children.

The County Court has jurisdiction to declare null and void its own proceedings in a case in which it had no jurisdiction in the first instance. (Note 27.)

Appeal from Washington. Munson filed his petition in the County Court of Washington county to September Term, 1851, alleging that he had been appointed guardian of Albert and Ann Jordan, minor heirs of Stephen Jordan, deceased, by the County Court of Burleson county, at the April Term, 1851, of said court; that Newson, the defendant, at the September Term, 1850, of said County Court of Washington county, had obtained letters of guardianship of said minors, and by virtue of said appointment was then seeking to obtain possession and control of the property of said minors; that at the time of granting said letters of guardianship to said Newson, and for a long time previous, said minors had their residence in the county of Burleson; that said minors were not within the jurisdiction of said County Court of Washington county; that said letters were therefore wholly null and void; and further, that said letters had been obtained without legal and proper notice, &c. Wherefore he prayed that said letters might be annulled.

Newson alleged in his answer that Stephen Jordan, the father, at and for a long time before his decease, was a citizen of Washington; that said minors had been removed out of the county of Washington by the wrongful acts of the said Munson; that he, Newson, had been lawfully appointed guardian of said minors; that Munson had possession and control of them, praying that he might be required to deliver them up to said Newson.

An agreement was filed that Stephen Jordan died in the county of Washington in 1839; that letters of administration were taken out in said county upon his estate; that he left a widow and two children, said Albert and Ann; that his widow intermarried with Munson in 1843; that she, with her two said children, then removed to Burleson county; that said children had continued to reside in said county of Burleson, with said Munson, up to the present time, and that said Albert and Ann “are under fourteen years of age.”

The grant of letters of guardianship by the County Court of Burleson county to Munson was not denied. It appeared that Newson was the brother of the mother of the minors, Albert and Ann, and that the mother had died in Burleson.

The County Court dismissed Munson's petition. Munson appealed to the District Court. On motion of Newson the District Court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

J. Sayles, for appellant.

A. M. Lewis and J. Willie, for appellee.


It is very clear that the County Court of Washington county had no authority to grant the letters of guardianship now sought to be revoked. The minors, on the intermarriage of their mother with the appellant, had removed to Burleson connty, and have since continued to reside there. The appointment of their guardians pertained to the jurisdiction of the chief justice of the latter and not of the former county. The statute of 1848, in several of its provisions, declares in effect that the guardianship of minors is within the special cognizance of the chief justices of the counties of their respective domiciles. The third section (art. 1534) provides that whenever it shall come to the knowledge of any chief justice that there is within his county any minor without any legal or natural guardian, if such minor be under the age of fourteen years, such chief justice shall appoint a guardian for such minor; and the section further provides for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Young v. Hiner
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1904
    ...The order removing the minor's disabilities did not give him power to make a valid conveyance. 48 Ark. 642; 32 Me. 102; 4 Johns. Ch. 549; 9 Tex. 109. The recital of notice does appear of record. 55 Ark. 35; 52 Ark. 376; 6 How. Pr. 161. A domestic judgment entered upon the unauthorized appea......
  • Weeks v. De Young
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • July 1, 1926 some one interested in the subject-matter of the proceedings. Controverting the rule stated and adopted by us, appellee cites Munson v. Newson, 9 Tex. 109, wherein it is held that under the act of 1848 (Hart. Dig. p. 478), the appointment of a guardian by the Chief Justice of any county,......
  • Willis v. Graf
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • November 7, 1923
    ...grounds of equitable relief presented in his petition, he may connect therewith a money demand against the estate of a decedent. Munson v. Newson, 9 Tex. 109. It furthermore appears from the record in this case that the plaintiff below sought a personal judgment against Willis as the maker ......
  • Roy v. Whitaker
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • March 10, 1898
    ...want of jurisdiction in the court a quo. Gray v. Maddox, 5 Tex. 528; Roeser v. Bellmer, 7 Tex. 1; Salmon v. Downs, 55 Tex. 241; Munson v. Newson, 9 Tex. 109. We think that, as this was one of the objects of the proceeding, it was proper to make parties all persons interested in the maintena......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT