Court Opinion

ID: 9683070
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:21:50.022208+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:44.363708
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing
Appellee, in his motion for rehearing, asserts in effect that this Court committed fundamental error since it lacked jurisdiction to render judgment against him because there is no evidence that appellant’s claim was presented to the guardian and rejected and that suit was commenced within 90 days after the claim was rejected. Appellant pleaded: “That Plaintiff did duly present his claim attached hereto and marked Exhibit ‘B’ for the above described materials for payment to Defendant, William O. Ridgway, and Defendant William O. Ridgway, Jr., did reject said claim.” Ap-pellee’s answer contains no general denial nor any special denial of such allegation, which therefore must be taken as true. Bauman v. Chambers, 91 Tex. 108, 41 S.W. 471 (1897); Diaz v. Chinn, 150 S.W.2d 411 (Tex.Civ.App.1941, n. w. h.). In Bauman v. Chambers, our Supreme Court also held that such admitted allegations need not be read in evidence. See also McDonald, Texas Civil Practice, sec. 7.23, p. 645.
It was not necessary for appellant to present its claim for attorney’s fees to the guardian as required by Section 314, Texas Probate Code, V.A.T.S., since the claim was for an undetermined and uncertain amount. Boykins v. Parr, 327 S.W.2d 463, Tex.Civ.App.1959, writ ref., n. r. e., and authorities there cited.
Rehearing overruled.