Fort v. Fitts
Citations
- 66 Tex. 593
- 1 S.W. 563
- 1886 Tex. LEXIS 575
Syllabus
<p>1. Practice—Jurisdiction—District Court—Administrator’s Bond—Devastavit —The district court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of a suit against the sureties on the bond of an administrator to recover money, belonging to the estate, alleged to have been received and converted by him.</p> <p>2. Same—Parties—In case an administrator de bonis non has been appointed, he is the proper plaintiff in such a suit. (R.S., 1960.) But in case no administrator de bonis non has been appointed, and there be no debts, the suit can be instituted by the heirs or other distributees of the estate. (Following, Giddings v. Steele, 28 Tex., 733; Bufford v. Halliman, 10 Tex., 560; Patton v. Gregory, 21 Tex., 513.)</p> <p>3. Case compared—Timmins v. Bonner, 58 Tex., 554, compared.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- denying defendant's claim that counsel was ineffective for disclosing his prior convictions to the jury in voir dire where defendant's criminal record was relevant to his alibi defense
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Willie
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.