State v. Stone, 4953

• Decision Date: 23 September 1954
• Docket Number: No. 4953,4953
• Citation: 271 S.W.2d 741
• Parties: The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. Mamie Corine STONE et al., Appellees.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 741

271 S.W.2d 741

The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. Mamie Corine STONE et al., Appellees.

No. 4953.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Beaumont.

Sept. 23, 1954.

Joseph A. Janeke and R. G. Poling, Attorney General's Department, Austin, for appellant.

Ross Hightower, Livingston, Orville C. Walker, San Antonio, for appellees.

ANDERSON, Justice.

The State seeks reimbursement out of the estate of Walker J. Mills, deceased, for the cost of supporting, maintaining and treating George Mills, an adult son of the decedent, in the Austin State Hospital. Walter J. Mills never at any time expressly agreed, either in writing or orally, to reimburse the State any part of such cost; and the State relies altogether on the provisions of Article 3196a, V.A.C.S., as the basis for the right asserted by it. We here quote the provisions of the statute which will require discussion in this opinion:

'Section 1. Patients admitted to State hospitals and State psychopathic hospitals shall be of two classes, to wit:

'Indigent patients;

'Non-indigent patients;

'Indigent patients are those who possess no property of any kind nor have anyone legally responsible for their support, and who are unable to reimburse the State. This class shall be supported at the expense of the State.

'Non-indigent patients are those who possess some property out of which the State may be reimbursed, or who have someone legally liable for their support. This class shall be kept and maintained at the expense of the State, as in the first instance, but in such cases the State shall have the right to be reimbursed for the support, maintenance, and treatment of such patients.

'Sec. 2. Where the patient has no sufficient estate of his own, he shall be maintained at the expense:

'Of the husband or wife of such person, if able to do so;

'Of the father or mother of such person, if able to do so.

'Sec. 3. The State Board of Control is authorized to demand and conduct investigations in the County Court to determine whether or not a patient is possessed of or entitled to property and/or whether or not some other person is legally liable for his support, maintenance, and treatment and to pay therefor, and to have citation issued and witnesses summoned to be heard on said investigation.

'Sec. 4. The State Board of Control, directly or through an authorized agent or agents, may make contract fixing the price for the support, maintenance, and treatment of patients in any State hospital or psychopathic hospital at a sum not to exceed the cost of same or for such part thereof as such respective patient, his relatives or guardian of his estate may be able to and agree to pay, and binding the persons making such contracts to payment thereunder.

'Sec. 5. Upon the written request of the State Board of Control the County or District Attorney, or in case of the refusal or inability of both to act, the Attorney General, shall represent the State in filing a claim in Probate Court or a petition in a Court of competent jurisdiction, wherein the guardian of such patient and/or other person legally liable for his support, may be cited to appear then and there to show cause why the State should not have judgment against him or them for the amount due it for the support, maintenance, and treatment of such patient; and, upon sufficient showing, judgment may be entered against such guardian or other persons for the amount found to be due the State, which judgment may be enforced as in other cases. A verified account, sworn to by the superintendent of the respective hospitals or psychopathic hospitals wherein such patient is being treated, or has been treated, as to the amount due shall be sufficient evidence to authorize the Court to render judgment therein. * * *'

Having been first duly adjudged to be a person of unsound mind and ordered committed to a state institution, George Mills was admitted to the Austin State Hospital as a patient and inmate on November 21, 1932. He was then approximately 25 years of age, having been born on September 23, 1907. He remained in the hospital as a patient and inmate continuously, and was supported, maintained and treated by the State at its expense, from November 21, 1932, until after his father's death on February 16, 1951. The State seeks reimbursement at the rate of five dollars per week for the full period commencing November 21, 1932, and extending through January 31, 1951. The aggregate amount thus arrived at is $4,729.77. Upon trial of the case it was stipulated that $5.00 per week had been the actual cost of maintaining the patient during the time for which reimbursement is sought; and a verified account showing the amount due, sworn to by the superintendent of the Austin State Hospital, was treated by stipulation of the parties as being in evidence and as being correct.

George Mills was of sound mind until after he reached his majority, and for a time after reaching his majority he was employed for wages by an employer other than his father. However, at the time he entered the hospital he was possessed of no property of any kind. He did not subsequently come into possession of any property, and was never possessed of funds with which to reimburse the State any part of the expense incurred by it in his behalf. He was never married, had no issue, and no guardian of either his person or his estate was ever appointed.

Walter J. Mills, the father, lived in Polk County, Texas, and such estate as he possessed was there situated, from the time his son entered the hospital until his own death. No demand was ever made of him during his lifetime to reimburse the State any part of the expense incident to his son's support, maintenance and treatment; and no legal proceedings seeking such reimbursement were ever instituted against him. He died testate on February 16, 1951. Subsequently his will was duly admitted to probate in the probate court of Polk County, and on March 21, 1951, letters testamentary were issued to the independent executor named in the will. No claim on behalf of the State appears to have been presented to the executor for allowance during the time he acted in that capacity.

Walter J. Mills left an estate, consisting of both real and personal property, of the net value of approximately $21,000; and upon trial of the case at bar it was stipulated that the inventory and appraisement on file in the probate proceedings 'reflects property owned, or its equivalent in kind, that Walter Mills owned prior to and during the period of commitment of George Mills in the State Hospital at Austin, Texas.' He bequeathed all of his property, both real and personal, to his two daughters, Mamie Corine Stone and Carrie Jane Walker, to the complete exclusion of his son George.

This suit was instituted against Mamie Corine Stone and Carrie Jane Walker, as the distributees of their father's estate, as is provided for by Art. 3464, V.A.C.S., their husbands being joined pro forma. The defendants admit in their answer that the 'estate devised (by the will of Walter J. Mills) was delivered to the respective devisees thereunder, by the Independent Executor of said estate'; and, crediting allegations contained in the plaintiff's petition, this appears to have occurred on or about June 2, 1951.

The plaintiff's amended petition, on which it went to trial, and which was filed May 25, 1953, indicates that the suit was originally instituted sometime during April, 1953.

The defendants answered by general denial, by a plea of the two-year statute of limitation (setting up that more than two years elapsed between the death of Walter J. Mills and the filing of suit), and by pleas, in substance: that they themselves were neither liable nor suable under the statute; that such cause of action as the State may have had against Walter J. Mills was not of a nature that survived the latter's death; that by failing to make claim against Walter J. Mills during his lifetime the State waived its right to make claim for reimbursement out of his estate; that since George Mills was an adult during all the time he was in the hospital, his father was not legally liable, either at common law or under the statute, for his (George's) support and maintenance therein; and that at no time while George Mills was in the hospital was his father able to pay any amount to the State for his (George's) support, maintenance and treatment, and therefore never became liable to reimburse the State.

Trial was to the court, without a jury, and resulted in a judgment that the plaintiff, The State of Texas, take nothing. The State has duly perfected its appeal.

At the request of the State, the trial court filed its findings of fact and conclusions of law. Substantially the facts we have already recited were found, and in addition (in findings eight and nine) it was found in substance, that Walter J. Mills 'had some property' at the time his son was committed to the hospital; that after the son was committed to the hospital there was some increase from time to time in the father's earnings; that the father maintained a home, and 'cared for the remainder of his family from and after the date of the commitment of George Mills, until they had reached their majority'; that while the son was in the hospital the father had neither a large nor a steady income, and did not at any one time have on hand more than 'a few hundred dollars' with which to pay bills; and that during some of the time while the son was in the hospital the father was a victim of physical infirmities which 'limited his activities as a farmer.'

It should be noted at this point, we think, and we shall later revert to the subject, that these last mentioned findings cannot, in our opinion, be construed as a finding that during his lifetime Walter J. Mills either was or was not able to pay for the support, maintenance and treatment of his son in the hospital. They amount to no more than findings of evidentiary matters bearing...