Reese v. Hicks
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Bastrop. The plaintiff in error had been the administrator of one Milton Hicks, deceased, who departed this life in 1839, and having finally, settled with said estate, was declared to be discharged, on his producing a receipt of the delivery of the property of the estate to the heirs of the deceased.
Read the full summary
Error from Bastrop. The plaintiff in error had been the administrator of one Milton Hicks, deceased, who departed this life in 1839, and having finally, settled with said estate, was declared to be discharged, on his producing a receipt of the delivery of the property of the estate to the heirs of the deceased. In 1.849, William Hicks and Mary Hicks, the parents of the deceased, filed their petition complaining of negligence and waste by the plaintiff, as administrator, and surcharging and falsifying his account, and praying that the same might be revised and corrected. Snch proceedings were…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
This judgment has been brought up by writ of error, and for reversal it is assigned,
1st. That the Court erred, in the state of the pleadings, in perpetuating the injunction against the execution as to Mary Hicks.
2nd. In ordering an execution to issue in favor of Mary Hicks, it not appearing that she was sole heir, or any heir of William Hicks, or that there was any petition for such execution.
In order to determine whether there was error in decreeing the whole amount of the judgment to Mary Hicks, it will be necessary to consider the extent of her interest in the estate, for…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Sparks v. SpenceTexas Supreme Court · 1874