Kleinecke v. Woodward

Citations

• 42 Tex. 311

Syllabus

<p>1. Jurisdiction—Probate Court. Under the Prohate Act of 1848, the jurisdiction of the Probate Court was not dependent on the averment in the petition for administration of facts, showing its necessity; nor will the absence of any evidence of the presentation or approval or existence of such claims against the estate, require such administration to be held void ; nor is it necessary to the validity of an administration that the reason or necessity for administration appear of record.</p> <p>2. Limitation. A suit was brought in 1874 by parties between thirty-eight and forty years of age, against a purchaser at administrator’s sale, made twenty years before, of their father’s estate, who had died in 1851. Plaintiffs also alleging want of 'notice of such administration and sale until the year suit was instituted. Held, that the plaintiffs’ cause of action was barred in two years after their majority, and so that the action was barred.</p> <p>8. Bill op Review—Limitation. Such suit brought by heirs to set aside an administration sale of property sold by their father’s administrator on the ground of fraud, is in substance a bill of review, and barred in two years, and in case of minors two years after their majority.</p> <p>4. Quaere: Can an attorney of an administrator purchasing at his sale be an innocent purchaser, when such sale is attacked for irregularities.</p>