Court Opinion

ID: 9830565
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:17:25.053144+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:24.345059
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The case of Rowe v. Dyess (Tex. Com. App.) 213 S. W. 234, recently decided by Section B, Commission of Appeals, and cited by appellee as sustaining her contention, has no bearing upon the question here involved. In the cited case it was held that an administrator was *973not entitled to allowance for attorney’s fees incurred in tlie prosecution of his personal claim against the estate, nor in his contest for appointment as administrator, hut that he was entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees in good faith incurred in resisting an attempt to withdraw the estate from administration. Nothing said in our original opinion is in conflict with the holding in the Rowe v. Dyess Case nor do we see that the latter case has any controlling effect upon the questions here Involved.
Motion for rehearing is overruled.