Court Opinion

ID: 9774554
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:24:08.44983+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:10.178535
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Petitioners on motion for rehearing ask the Court to say that if the declaratory judgment were before us, we would find it void. We cannot determine the validity of a judgment which is not before us. We call attention, however, to the first sentence of section 11 of the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act:
“When declaratory relief is sought, all persons shall be made parties who have or *456claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding.” Article 2524— 1, sec. 11, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Stats.
As pointed out in the opinion, the declaratory judgment purports to add another heir and a surviving wife to share in the estates being administered by petitioners. Under the wording of the statute itself, parties whose interests are affected must be made parties, and the declaration cannot prejudice the rights of persons not party to the proceeding. We have observed that only the person seeking the declaration was a party to that action. If there are no opposing rights, an opinion is purely advisory and void; if there are opposing rights, all interests affected must be party if the declaration is to be valid. Just as jurisdiction may not be conferred by agreement of the parties, so it may not be conferred by agreement between the sole party to an action and the court.
Motion overruled.