Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Commission

Decision Date13 July 1939
Docket NumberNo. 3509.,3509.
Citation131 S.W.2d 686
PartiesSTEWART ABSTRACT CO. et al. v. JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF JEFFERSON COUNTY et al.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County; R. L. Murray, Judge.

Suit by the Judicial Commission of Jefferson County and others against the Stewart Abstract Company and others to enjoin defendants from engaging in alleged illegal practice of law. From an order overruling defendants' plea of privilege seeking to have the venue of the case transferred to Galveston county, defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

Stewart & DeLange, of Houston, for appellant.

H. C. Keen, Gilbert T. Adams, Geo. A. Weller, W. T. McNeill, W. O. Bowers, John L. Bell, A. M. Huffman, Chas. J. Heidrick, and W. M. Crook, all of Beaumont, and B. T. McWhorter, Jr., of Pt. Arthur, for appellees.

COMBS, Justice.

This appeal is from an order overruling a plea of privilege filed by appellants, seeking to have the venue of the case transferred to Galveston County, where the Stewart Abstract Company, a corporation, has its principal office. The other appellant, Stewart Title Guaranty Company, is also a corporation and has its office and place of business in El Paso. Both appellants maintain an office and place of business in Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. In fact they appear to be operated under the same management, the same person being manager of both.

The only question presented by this appeal is the contention of appellants that appellees, on the hearing of the plea, did not establish prima facie a cause of action. The suit was filed in the 60th District Court of Jefferson County by Gilbert T. Adams, W. T. McNeill, A. M. Huffman, W. M. Crook, W. O. Bowers, H. C. Keen, Geo. A. Weller, John L. Bell, Charles Heidrick and B. T. McWhorter, Jr., individually and as members of a group of the Jefferson County Bar, designated as "Judicial Commission of Jefferson County, Texas." The petition charged the defendants, Stewart Title Guaranty Company and Stewart Abstract Company, with the illegal practice of law and sought an injunction enjoining them, their officers and agents, and employees, from engaging in the practice of law and from doing any of several specified acts alleged to have been done in the past by the defendants. The specific acts charged against the defendants were:

"(a) That the Respondents, or each of them, furnish opinions as to the condition of titles to real estate with or without insuring such titles.

"(b) That they and each of them engage in drawing deeds, mortgages, releases, leases, affidavits, contracts, promissory notes and other legal papers for others for pay.

"(c) That they each advise others on legal matters.

"(d) That they each prepare escrow agreements and instructions for others.

"(e) That they and each of them maintain a legal department for the benefit of others.

"(f) That they each furnish legal services and legal advice to others.

"(g) That they each hold themselves out to perform legal services which require use of legal knowledge or skill.

"(h) That they each advertise for legal business.

"(i) That they each openly solicit legal employment and business."

We shall state only briefly the evidence offered by plaintiffs on the hearing of the plea. It was shown that in connection with FHA loans, a number of which seem to have been handled by defendants, it has been the custom of the defendants to prepare, or fill out on forms furnished them, the mortgages or mechanic's liens, notes, the transfer thereof, etc., the charges made therefor being included in the fee charged for insuring the title. It was also shown that a title opinion was prepared in connection with each such guarantee of title. It was testified by Miss N. G. Robinson, the local manager of the defendant companies, and who is also a licensed practicing attorney, that such opinions are prepared for the benefit of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company. However, as established by the testimony of a witness, Walter R. Wortman, he received from the Stewart Title Guaranty Company an opinion on his title, and the opinion was introduced in evidence. It appears to be a copy of the opinion prepared for use of the Title Company and was signed, "N. G. Robertson, Attorney for Stewart Title Guaranty Co., Beaumont, Texas." There was also introduced in evidence an excerpt taken from page 83 of the directory of the American Title Association, 1938, and the symbols from page 1 of the directory, which show that Stewart Abstract Company, Beaumont, Texas, was listed for, "A", that is abstracts; "TI", that is title insurance, and "E", examinations. There was also introduced in evidence an advertisement appearing in the Beaumont Enterprise, a daily newspaper, on Monday, May 10, 1937, by the Stewart Abstract Company, reading: "Know that it is legally yours. Check the title before you buy or build. Don't run the risk of losing your investment or being involved in lengthy court action. Let our experienced staff check the title before you invest any money."

It was shown by the testimony of a witness, E. L. Stewart, that on July 27, 1937, after the above mentioned advertisement appeared in the Beaumont Enterprise, he applied to the Stewart Title Guaranty Company for an opinion as to the title of lots 7 and 8, in block 70, of the North Addition to the City of Beaumont, and that he received an opinion on the title, which opinion was introduced in evidence and reads as follows:

                              "`P-11, ROB'
                

"Attorney's Opinion Guaranty File No. 0-2136

"Legal Description of Property Under Search: All of Lots Seven (7) and Eight (8) in Block No. Seventy (70), of the North Addition to the City of Beaumont, except a strip 50 feet wide across the East end of said lots, according to the map or plat of said addition of record in the office of the County Clerk of said County and State.

                "Title Good In: Neal Richardson, as of July
                      27, 1937, at 8 A. M. Angelina Richardson
                      Guardian of Neal Richardson
                      N.C.M
                

"Subject To:

"(1) The unpaid balance on one certain note originally for $800., dated January 28, 1926, executed by Neal Richardson, payable to the order of R.A.Ferrand in monthly installments of $30., each until paid, bearing interest from date until paid at 10% per annum. Said note is secured by Deed of Trust to C. B. Charlton, Trustee for R.A.Ferrand, dated January 28, 1926, and recorded in Vol. 163, page 340, M. & L. Records, Jefferson County, Texas.

"(a) Said lien is not released of record but is barred by limitations.

"(2) Paving Lien Contract in the amount of $392, executed by Neal Richardson & Wife, Angelina Richardson, to Broussard-Warfield Co., certificate No. 311, said contract being dated, December 2, 1930, and recorded in Vol. 266, page 542, M & L Records of Jefferson County, Texas. Said certificate and lien were transferred by Broussard-Warfield Co., to The Broussard Trust on August 22, 1931, of record in Volume 278, page 231, M & L Records, of Jefferson County, Texas.

"(a) Said lien is not released of record.

"(3) Satisfactory inquiry should be made as to homestead rights of present owners in above property, and as to any changes in the legal and marital status of present owners since their acquisition of property.

"(4) Satisfactory investigation should be made by party in interest, as to matters of area, boundary lines, conflicts, compliance with restrictions, location of improvements, adverse possession, and rights of occupants, and those under whom they claim, as to which matters we have made no investigation, and against which we do not guarantee.

"(5) If Improvements recently completed, or under construction or to be erected, satisfactory proof should be furnished of the payment of all claims for labor performed, and materials furnished, in connection therewith, and written acceptance thereof by the owners furnished.

"(6) Tax Certificates should be furnished showing payment of all taxes and statements furnished showing taxes delinquent.

                    "Very truly yours
                         "Frank Lander
                         "Frank Lander, Attorney for
                           Stewart Title Guaranty Co.,
                           Beaumont, Texas."
                

There was next introduced in evidence a receipt, reading as follows:

                               "`P-12, ROB'
                "Receipt Dated 7/27/1937 Stewart Title
                   Guaranty Company to E. L. Stewart
                          "Beaumont, Texas, 7-27-1937
                "E. L. Stewart
                 In Account with
                     Stewart Title Guaranty Company
                "Phone 4952            320 Perlstein Building
                  "Guaranty No
                     "Title Work                   $15.00
                     "Paid 7-27-37
                     "Stewart Abst.Co., By F.L."
                

Miss Nellie G. Robertson, manager of the appellant companies, and who is, as above stated, also a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • West Virginia State Bar v. Earley
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • June 9, 1959
    ...Bar Association v. Automobile Service Association, 55 R.I. 122, 179 A. 139, 100 A.L.R. 226; Stewart Abstract Company v. Judicial Commission of Jefferson County, Tex.Civ.App., 131 S.W.2d 686; McCloskey v. San Antonio Public Service Company, Tex.Civ.App., 51 S.W.2d 1088; Commonwealth v. Jones......
  • Hulse v. Criger
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 14, 1952
    ...v. Alfani, 227 N.Y. 334, 125 N.E. 671; Cain v. Merchants National Bank & Trust Co., 66 N.D. 746, 268 N.W. 719; Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Comm., Tex.Civ.App., 131 S.W.2d 686; Hexter Title & Abstract Co. v. Grievance Comm., 142 Tex. 506, 179 S.W.2d 946, 157 A.L.R. 268; Paul v. Stanley,......
  • Nationwide Mut. Ins. v. Unauthorized Prac. of Law
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • February 20, 2002
    ...(holding that there was a fact question regarding whether the title company was engaged in the practice of law); Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Comm'n, 131 S.W.2d 686, 690 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1939, no writ). There now exists a statute which specifically prohibits title companies from d......
  • Palmer v. Unauthorized Practice Com. of State Bar, 207
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 12, 1969
    ...preparation of legal instruments of all kinds and all advice to clients involve the practice of law. Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Commission of Jefferson County, 131 S.W.2d 686 (Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist.; In re Duncan, 83 S.C. 186, 65 S.E. 210, 24 L.R.A.,N.S., 750. A deed form can be......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Defense by salaried counsel: a bane or a blessing?
    • United States
    • Defense Counsel Journal Vol. 61 No. 4, October 1994
    • October 1, 1994
    ...note 5. (11.) See, e.g., Mullins-Johnson, 9 F.Supp. 175. (12.) E.g., Stewart Abstract Co. v. Judicial Commission of Jefferson County, 131 S.W.2d 686 (Tex.Civ.App. 1939); Pacific Employers Inc. Co. v. Carpenter, 10 Cal.App.2d 592 (Cal.App. 1936). (13.) In re Otterness, 232 N.W. 318 (Minn. 19......

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