Manuel v. Whitehead

Decided July 1, 1858

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1858-07-01

Tried below before the Hon. Thomas J. Devine. This was a suit brought by Thomas Whitehead, in the District Court, against Mariano Roderiguez, as guardian of the minors, Manuel Iturri and Vicenta Iturri, for the one third life interest which he claimed to certain real estate, consisting of certain parcels of land, and a house and lot in the city of San Antonio ; and for one third of the rents and profits of said house and lot, alleged to have been received by said guardian;…

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““It would seem, on general principles, that, after it was made apparent to the court that the plaintiff had been appointed guardian of the defendants, the suit ought to have been dismissed.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Pryor v. Krause

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1858-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1961

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wheeler, Ch. J.

¶1The judgment is erroneous, and must be reversed, for the reason that the verdict is unsupported by evidence. No evidence appears in the statement of facts, to warrant the jury in finding for the plaintiff the amount of their verdict, upon which the court gave judgment.

¶2It would seem, on general principles, that after it was made apparent to the court, that the plaintiff had been appointed guardian of the defendants, the suit ought to have been dismissed. But as this point has not been noticed by counsel in argument, it need not now be decided. The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

¶3Reversed and remanded.