Memory (asecured (a Memory Care Care Unit).
Silverado Appx. 0204 No. 1-15-586-CV 3322 II. II. JUDICIAL JUDICIAL ADMISSION ADMISSIONOF OFM ENTAL MENTALINCAPACITY INCAPACITYTO TOC ONTRACT CONTRACT 7. 7. Less Less tthan hanthirty thirty(30) (30)ddays aysaftersecuring securingthe newdocuments, thenew Plaintiffsinitiated documents,Plaintiffs initiatedthis this
guardianshipproceeding proceedingby by filingtheir their OriginalPetition PetitionforAppointment for Appointmentof of Temporary and and P ermanent Permanent Guardianof ofR S. uby Ruby Inconnection S. Peterson. Inconnection therewith, PlaintiffsDonny Donny Leslie LeslieP eterson Peterson and and MackeyGlen GlenPeterson sworeuunder Petersonswore nderooath aththatthey that theyhadreadthe had read the
Plainttffs' Original OriginalPetition oAppoint Petitiontto Appoint TemporaryandPermanent and PermanentGuardian Guardianoof fthe the Person Person aand ndEstate EstateooffRuby RubySS..Peterson PetersonAND ANDTHAT THATEEACH ACHOF THEFACTUAL OFTHE FACTUAL STATEMENTS STATEMENTSCONTAINED CONTAINEDTTHEREIN HEREINWERE(A)WITHIN WERE (A) WITHIN THEIR PERSONAL PERSONAL K NOWLEDGE; KNOWLEDGE; AND(2)WERETRUEANDCORRECT. AND (2) WERE TRUE AND CORRECT. 8. 8. InParagraph In Paragraph 113 3oftheir of their OriginalPetition, Petition, PlaintiffDonny DonnyLeslie Petersonaand LesliePeterson ndMackey Mackey their Glen Glen Peterson sworetthat Peterson swore hattthe hefollowing followingfacts factsw erewithin were within theirpersonal personalknowledge knowledgeand and were true and were true andcorrect: correct: also topetitioners appearsto "It also appears petitionersthat that becauseofthe proposed of the proposedwward's ard's mental condition, condition,she sheiissunabletoprotect to protectherselformake herselfor makedecisions decisionsthat arein thatare inthe the bestinterest ofhererpersonaland best interest ofh andffmancial inancial affairs. affairs.Still, Still,believing believingin inthe the petitioners foregoing, petitionersaccepted theproposedward's signed of owerofattorney accepted the proposed ward's signedppower attorneyon on ll-15-13, 11-15-13,not not contradictorytotheir belief to their beliefintheir in theirmother's mother'smental mental limitations, butperhapsin lucidmomentthat limitations, but perhaps inaa lucidmoment sheunderstood whatshe was that she understood what shewas signing." signing."
9. 9. Theabove statements The above statementsare considered TRUE JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS under Texas are considered TRUE JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS under Texas law.A truejudicialadmission is formalwaiver ofproofusually FOUND IN law. A true judicial admission is aa formal waiver of proof usually FOUND IN PLEADINGS thestipulations oftheparties.Ajudicial is PLEADINGS or or the stipulations of the parties. A judicial admission is CONCLUSIVE
Silverado Appx. 0205 No. 1-15-586-CV 3323 UPON UPON THE THEPARTY PARTYMAKING MAKINGIT, IT.AND ANDIT ITRELIEVESTHEOPPOSING RELIEVESTHEOPPOSING PARTY'S PARTY'S BURDENOFPROVING BURDENOFPROVINGTHE THEA DMITTED ADMITTEDFACT, ANDBARS FACT.ANDBARSTHE THE ADMITTING ADMITTING PARTY PARTYFROM FROMDISPUTING IT. SeeMendoza DISPUTINGIT.See v.Fidelity Mendozav. Fidelity Guaranty Ins. Ins. U nderwriters, Underwriters, 606 606 S .W.2d S.W.2d 692, 692,694 694(Tex. 1980),citing (Tex. 1980),citingGevinson v.M Gevinsonv. anhattan Manhattan
Construction C0.ofOklahoma, Co. of Oklahoma,449S.W.2d 449 S.W.2d458,467(Tex.1969); 458, 467 (Tex. 1969);M cCormick McCormickandRay, and Ray, Texas Texas L awofEvidence Law § 1127(2ded.1956). of Evidence§1127 (2d ed. 1956).
10. 10. Thus, Thus, PLAINTIFFS PLAINTIFFSDONNY DONNYLESLIE LESLIEPETERSON PETERSONAND ANDMACKEY MACKEYGLEN GLEN PETERSON PETERSON HAVE HAVECONCLUSIVELY CONCLUSIVELYADMITTEDTHAT,byNovember ADMITTEDTHAT, 15,22013: by November15, 013: (a)BECAUSE (a) BECAUSE OF OF THEPROPOSED 'SMENTAL PROPOSED WARD'S MENTALCONDITION, CONDITION. SHEIS IS UNABLE UNABLE TO TOP ROTECT PROTECTHERSELF HERSELFOR ORM AKE MAKEDECISIONS DECISIONS THAT AREIN TARE INTHE THE BESTINTEREST OF HER PERSONALANDFINANCIAL BEST INTEREST OFHERPERSONAL AND FINANCIALAFFAIRS; AFFAIRS;aand nd(b) (b) TIL4 TSTILL THAT STILLBELIEVINGINTHE BELIEVING THEFOREGOING, FOREGOING,PETITIONERS PETITIONERSACCEPTED ACCEPTED THEPROPOSED SIGNED THE PROPOSED WARD'S SIGNEDPOWER POWEROFATTORNEY OF ATTORNEYON ON1 NOT 1-15-13, 11-15-13, NOT CONTRADICTORYTOTHEIR BELIEFIN THEIRMOTHERMENTAL CONTRADICTORY TO THEIR BELIEFINTHEIRMOTHER'S MENTAL
LIMITATIONS.
11. 11. Theabove admissions