Legal Opinion

Schulte v. Marik

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 7, 1985No. 13-85-333-CVPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

UTTER, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a will contest admitting the will and a codicil to probate and awarding attorney’s fees to appellee to be paid out of the estate. Neither party contests the trial court’s judgment admitting the will or codicil to probate. We reverse that portion of the trial court’s judgment awarding appellee attorney’s fees.

The only issue before us is whether Section 243 of the TEX.PROBATE CODE1 authorizes the recovery of attorney’s fees from the estate by appellee, an “alternate or successor” independent executor, for “his necessary expenses”…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Central Education Agency v. Independent School DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1953
  2. W. T. Huff. v. J. H. Huff, Admstr.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Wich v. FlemingTexas Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Russell v. MoelingTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Salmon v. SalmonTexas Supreme Court · 1965

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Harkins v. Crews, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1995
  2. In Re Estate of Huff, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2000
  3. In Re Estate of Wilcox, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2006
  4. in the Estate of Irma Lou Wilcox, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API