Walker County Lumber Co. v. Edmonds
| Decision Date | 06 October 1927 |
| Docket Number | (No. 1595.) |
| Citation | 298 S.W. 610 |
| Parties | WALKER COUNTY LUMBER CO. et al. v. EDMONDS et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, San Jacinto County; J. L. Manry, Judge.
Trespass to try title by the Walker County Lumber Company and others against G. W. Edmonds and others. G. W. Edmonds died, and his widow and heirs appeared in the case as defendants. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Reversed and remanded, with instructions.
Dean & Humphrey, of Huntsville, for appellants.
Browder & Browder, of Cold Springs, and Strode & Pitts, of Conroe, for appellees.
This was a trespass to try title suit, instituted in 1910 by appellant against G. W. Edmonds, who was claiming the land as the community property of himself and his wife. Edmonds was duly served and filed an answer by his attorney, Judge William McMurrey. He died shortly after filing his answer, leaving his widow, some adult children, and some minor children surviving him. The widow and adult children arranged with Judge McMurrey to represent them, and after this arrangement Judge McMurrey filed a supplemental plea, making the widow and all the children of the deceased parties defendant. This supplemental plea was not signed by him, nor does it bear the clerk's file mark. In some way not fully explained, it was attached to a copy of the original answer of G. W. Edmonds, inclosed in the wrapper of the original answer. After filing this plea for the widow and heirs, Judge McMurrey continued representing them until 1924, agreeing to various continuances during that time. After his clients had refused to consummate an agreement entered into by him under their instructions disposing of the lawsuit, Judge McMurrey withdrew from the case. After his withdrawal another attorney appeared for a year or two and represented the widow and adult heirs. Then he withdrew. After his withdrawal the widow and adult heirs employed Messrs. Browder & Browder and Strode & Pitts, who represented then continuously from that time and appear for them on this appeal. In 1921, the plaintiff filed an amended petition, making the widow and all the heirs parties defendant, but service of citation was not had under this plea. The papers of the case were lost for a part of the time. Attorneys for plaintiff testified that they had been in court practically at every term since the case was instituted, looking after this case. The following is a copy of the judge's trial docket entries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | Date of Filing
Number of | | | Kind of Action and |
| Name of Parties | Attorneys | |
Case | | | Party Demanding Jury |------------------------
| | | | Mo. | Day | Year
------------|-----------------------|----------------|-------------------------|---------|------|-------
| Walker Co. Lumber Co. | | | | |
1490 | v. | Dean, Humphrey | Try Title and Damages | Aug. | 25 | 1910
| G. W. Edmonds | & Powell | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Orders | | Minute Book |
------|------|--------| Orders of Court |-------|-------|
Month | Day | Year | | Vol. | Page | Process
------|------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|-------|-------|----------
Oct. | 31 | 1910 | Same order as in 1489 (set for Mon. 3rd week) | | |
Nov. | 14 | 1910 | Continued by agreement | | |
May | | 1911 | (No order) | | |
Oct. | 30 | 1911 | Set for Friday 2nd week | | |
Nov. | 10 | 1911 | Continued generally | | |
April | 29 | 1912 | " " | | |
Oct. | | 1912 | Same order as in 1489 (set Thursday 2nd week) | | |
Nov. | 7 | 1912 | Death of G. W. Edmonds suggested and sci fa to | | |
| | | personal representatives & cause contd. generally | | |
| | | for that purpose | | |
5 | 5 | 1913 | Transferred from the district court of San Jacinto | | |
| | | county, Texas, to the special district court | | |
| | | of said county | | |
8 | 4 | '13 | Continued by agreement | | |
2 | 3 | '14 | Defendant has leave to file 1st amended answer | | |
| | | Set for Mon. 2nd week | | |
2 | 11 | '14 | Continued to make parties | | |
8 | 3 | '14 | " " " " | | |
Nov. | 5 | 1914 | Set for trial Wednesday of 2nd week | | |
5 | 3 | '15 | Continued generally | | |
11 | 11 | '18 | " " | | |
5 | 4 | 1920 | Monday 2nd week | | |
5 | 10 | 1920 | Cont'd to make parties | | |
5 | 2 | '22 | Cont'd and set for Wed 2nd wk next Ct | | |
10 | 31 | '22 | Set for Wed 2nd week | | |
11 | 9 | '22 | Cont'd by agreement | | |
5 | 1 | '23 | " " deft & set for trial for Thursday 3rd | | |
| | | week next term | | |
11 | 19 | '24 | Wm. McMurrey granted leave to withdraw | | |
9 | 14 | '26 | Cont'd & set for Mon 2nd wk next court and not to | | |
| | | be reset | | |
2 | 14 | '27 | Thursday 3rd week." | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the third of March, 1927, Messrs. Browder & Browder and Strode & Pitts, as friends of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Booth v. State, 46456
...no writ). Having been employed by appellant during the trial, counsel may not assume the office of amicus curiae. Walker County Lumber Co. v. Edmonds, 298 S.W. 610, 612 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont, 1927, no writ). See also, 3 C.J.S. Amicus Curiae § 3, p. 1048 We are in accord with the statement......
-
Burger v. Burger
...only a few. See Thomas v. Driver, Tex.Civ.App., 55 S.W.2d 187; Broome v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 265 S.W.2d 897; Walker County Lbr. Co. v. Edmonds, Tex.Civ.App., 298 S.W. 610; Jackson v. Birk, Tex.Civ. App., 84 S.W.2d 332; Olcott v. Reese, Tex.Civ.App., 291 S.W. 261, and The State of Texas v. ......
-
Thomas v. Driver
...bring this proposition of amicus curiæ within the rule announced by this court in Olcott v. Reese, 291 S. W. 261; Walker County Lumber Co. v. Edmonds, 298 S. W. 610; by the Fort Worth Court of Civil Appeals in Fort Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. 41 S.W.(2d) 418, and by the San Antonio Court of Ci......
-
Broome v. Smith
...but is restricted to the office of helping the court only. See Olcott v. Reese, Tex.Civ.App., 291 S.W. 261; Walker County Lumber Co. v. Edmonds, Tex.Civ.App., 298 S.W. 610; Thomas v. Driver, Tex.Civ.App., 55 S.W.2d Furthermore, upon this feature, this record is entirely silent as to any app......