Case Name: C. M. Grogan et al v. J. G. Grogan et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1959-02-11
Citations: 159 Tex. 392
Docket Number: No. A-6969
Parties: C. M. Grogan Et Al v. J. G. Grogan Et Al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Reports
Volume: 159
Pages: 392–393

Head Matter:
C. M. Grogan Et Al v. J. G. Grogan Et Al.
No. A-6969.
Decided February 11, 1959.
Rehearing overruled March 25, 1959.
(322 S.W. 2d Series 514)
Carney & Mays, of Atlanta, for petitioner.
McClain & Harrell, of Conroe, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
This case involves the validity of two voting trusts agreements. The trial court, sitting without a jury, entered a judgment holding both trusts to be invalid. The judgment was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals. 315 S.W. 2d 34.
We do not believe the voting trusts to be invalid simply because H. N. Grogan, a settlor and the person for whose benefit it was found the trusts were executed, was himself a party to the agreement and was named as a trustee in them. See Boyer v. Nesbitt, 227 Pa. 398, 76 Atl. 103; De Marco v. Paramount Ice Corp. [Supreme Court of New York] 102 N.Y.S. 2d 692; Whiting v. Bryant, 102 Ohio App. 508, 131 N.E. 2d 425; 5 Fletcher, Corporations, Sec. 2091, p. 401 (rev. ed. 1952).
Nor do we think that the trusts were invalid merely because H. N. Grogan was the person who had the agreements drawn and who secured the signatures of most of the other settlors to the agreements.
Even though we feel the Court of Civil Appeals did not in all respects correctly declare the law, the application presents no error which requires reversal. The application for writ of error is Refused, No Reversible Error. Rule 483, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Opinion delivered February 11, 1959.
Smith, A. J., recused himself.
Rehearing overruled March 25, 1959.