Messner v. Giddings

Citations

• 65 Tex. 301
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 658

Syllabus

<p>1. Estates of minors—Constitution of 1866—Jurisdiction—District courts— County courts—On April 2, 1869, M. instituted a suit in the district court to divest her children, who were, at the time, minors, of the title to certain real estate in Texas, previously conveyed to them by a deed of gift from her, and to vest the same in W., offering to recompense the minors for their interest in the Texas property by a mortgage, to the extent of its value, upon property in the state of New Jersey, acquired by her from W. subsequently to her deed to them, and in exchange for which she had conveyed the Texas property, at a valuation agreed upon between W. and herself. The proceedings were wholly between M. and W.,and a decree was entered in the cause, divesting the children of the title to the Texas property and vesting it in W. The minors, after attaining majority, brought suit for its recovery. Held :</p> <p>(1) That no power exists in any person or tribunal to divest a minor of title to real estate, unless such power be conferred by the law-making department of the state;</p> <p>(2) That the district court had no jurisdiction of the matter in which it assumed to act, by any power conferred upon it by either the constitution of 1866 or the laws in force at the time. Its judgment granting the relief prayed for was the attempted exercise of an original jurisdiction conferred upon county courts alone, and was void;</p> <p>(3) That the district court, whether as a court of law or a court of equity, had only such power as the constitution gave it. There is no such power as the inherent power of a court, if by that is meant a power which a court may exercise without a law authorizing it;</p> <p>(4) When the constitution, in express terms, confers upon one court, and not upon another, jurisdiction over a particular subject-matter, it must be presumed that it was intended that the jurisdiction thus conferred should be exclusive.</p> <p>2. Cases reviewed—Rivers v. Durr, 46 Ala. 419;