Case Name: Mary A. Stephenson et al. v. Eugenia W. Chappell et al.
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1896-01-15
Citations: 12 Tex. Civ. App. 296
Docket Number: No. 872
Parties: Mary A. Stephenson et al. v. Eugenia W. Chappell et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Civil Appeals Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 296–303

Head Matter:
Mary A. Stephenson et al. v. Eugenia W. Chappell et al.
No. 872.
1. ¡Practice on Appeal — Appearance by Counsel — Waiver of Service of
Citation in Error.
Where counsel for defendants in error, by written endorsement on the brief filed by plaintiffs in error, waive the filing of such briefs in the trial court, this is an appearance in the appellate court such as precludes defendants in error from insisting on a motion to dismiss the appeal because the citation in error had not been served upon some of them prior to the return day thereof.
2. Community Estate — Authority of Guardian.
A guardian of minors has not the authority, without an order of court, to release to the survivor of a community estate, consisting of realty and personalty, the interest which his wards have therein as heirs.
3. Same — Presumption—Deed to Either Spouse.
Property conveyed by deed to either spouse during marriage is presumed to be community property, and the rule is not changed by the fact that the parties had recently removed to Texas when the deed was made.
4. Same — Value Estimated at What Date.
Where heirs sue to recover their interest in community personal property which has been withheld they are entitled to recover on the basis of its value at the time of trial.
5. Same — Improvements and Taxes.
In an action by heirs to recover their interests in community property which has been withheld by the father as survivor in community, the defendants were not entitled to credit for improvements and taxes during the time it was withheld, where it appeared that payment for these was made with community funds.
6. Special Verdict — Issue Omitted.
Where a special verdict fails to find all the facts put in issue by the pleading, it is insufficient, although the evidence shows the existence of the facts not found beyond controversy.
7. Evidence — Immaterial Objection.
An objection that the testimony of a guardian showed that she had received different amounts on claims due her ward from those shown by her receipts, should not be sustained, where it appears that the amounts shown by the receipts were taken as correct.
8. Practice on Appeal — Costs of Transcript — Superfluous Matter.
Where the transcript on appeal embraces a large amount of superfluous matter, the costs thereof will, upon motion, he taxed against the appellant.
Appeal from Dallas. Tried below before Hon. Edward Ghay.
George H. Plowman and Joseph M. Cary, for appellants.
-1. The lawful guardian being by statute entitled to the possession of all property of, and to collect all claims due to, the wards, and it being her duty to use diligence to recover wards’ property or claims, and being empowered to receive property in payment of any debt due the wards, the receipt by the guardian of the wards’ interest in such community and in Wm. H. Armstrong’s estate is valid. Rev. Stat., arts. 2170, 2171, 2183, 2542, 2545, 2547; Fretilliere v. Hines, 57 Texas, 392; Huppman v. Schmidt, 65 Texas, 586-7; Leatherwood v. Arnold, 66 Texas, 417; Randolph v. Junker, 1 Texas Civ. App., 517; Genet v. Tallmadge, 1 Johns. Chan., 1-3; Morrill v. Dickey, Id., 66; Mason v. Buchanan, 62 Ala., 110; Jones v. Jones, 20 Iowa, 388.
2. The amount of advancements received by defendants in error from Samuel Armstrong should he estimated in value on the basis of the estimate and value of the estates at the time the advancements were made and received, and not on the value on the day of the trial. Rev. Stat., art. 1651; Monroe v. Leigh, 15 Texas, 520; Maxwell v. Guyton, 20 Texas, 202; Scoby v. Sweat, 28 Texas, 386, 713; Halliday v. White, 33 Texas, 448, 460; Collins v. Box, 40 Texas, 191; Sparks v. Spence, 40 Texas, 694; Harris v. Reed, 47 Texas, 523; Connor v. Huff, 48 Texas, 364; Belcher v. Fox, 60 Texas, 531.
3. Plaintiff in error, Mrs. Stephenson, being called to testify by the defendants in error, could state any matter connected with the cause and pertinent to the issue to be tried. Rev. Stat., arts. 2240, 2242, 2248; Bradley v. Bradley, 13 Texas, 263; Graham v. Stephens, 15 Texas, 88; McCorkle v. Lawrence, 21 Texas, 731; Foster v. Spear, 22 Texas, 226.
4. The statements of Samuel and Eliza Armstrong to Jas. O. Adams showing the trust agreement in reference to the lands, being part of the res gestae, and admissions against their interests, should have been admitted in evidence in support of this defense of plaintiffs in error. 1 Rice on Evidence, par. 212 o, 221 a; Massey v. Massey, 20 Texas, 138; McGowen v. McGowen, 52 Texas, 657; Pilkington v. Railway, 70 Texas, 227-231.
5. The lands having been acquired by Samuel Armstrong within a few months after he came to Texas on a visit and prior to his removal here, no presumption would arise that said lands belonged to the community estate, but the contrary presumption would arise and the burden was on defendants in error to show that said lands were a part of the community estate of Samuel and Eliza Armstrong. Rev. Stat., art. 2852; Medlinka v. Downing, 39 Texas, 32; Duke v. Reid, 64 Texas, 715; Watts v. Miller, 76 Texas, 13; McDougal v. Bradford, 80 Texas, 558.
6. By the terms of the statute the survivor when required to account, is entitled to a deduction for all “community debts, unavoidable losses, necessary and reasonable expenses, and a reasonable commission for the management of the community estate.” Clift v. Clift, 72 Texas, 149; Thompson v. Jones, 77 Texas, 629; Robinson v. Moore, 1 Texas Civ. App., 93.
Leake, Henry, Reeves & Greer and Word & Charlton, for defendants in error.
1. The statute does not give the survivor who has qualified as such the right to take all the community estate at the valuation placed thereon by the appraisers.
2. The guardian of defendants in error could not extinguish their right and title to the lands sued for by any act or contract of herself, independent of the Probate Court. Stephens v. Shaw, 68 Texas, 283.
Delivered January 15, 1896.
3. Property acquired during marriage, by either spouse, is presumed to be community.
4. The survivor is not entitled to be credited with the value of improvements, unless he complies with the provisions of the statute, and keeps the account therein provided.

Opinion:
ON MOTION TO DISMISS.
FLY, Associate Justice.
Defendants in error have filed a motion to dismiss this cause for the reason that the citation in error was served on some of the defendants in error after the return day of the citation. The transcript in this case was filed in the Court of Civil Appeals at Dallas on April 20, 1895, and three days afterwards the following endorsement was made on the back of one of the briefs of plaintiffs in error, "Having received from plaintiffs in error copies of the within brief we hereby waive filing of same in the trial court." This agreement was signed by counsel who designated themselves, "Attys. for defts. in error." We conclude that the agreement was an appearance in the Appellate Court as to all of the defendants in error. The attorneys who represented the defendants in error in the trial court, and who represent them in the motion to dismiss, are those who signed the agreement, and it will be presumed that they were authorized to represent them in the Appellate Court on the writ of- error. The motion to dismiss will be overruled.
Overruled.