Jarvis v. Feild, 327 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2010, no pet.).

Estate Administration



Litigant objected to the court’s venue to probate a will. Because Litigant did not object until Litigant appealed the admission of the will to probate, the court held that she waived her venue argument.

Moral: Objections to venue should be timely filed or else they will be deemed waived.


Estate Administration



Litigant appealed asserting that an approved inventory was incomplete and misstated the value of the listed property. However, her appeal did not specifically indicate she was appealing the inventory order but rather objected to the approval of the account for final settlement which the court issued many months later. Litigant argued that the two orders were linked so the appeal of the account for final settlement automatically appealed the approval of the inventory. Although there was no support for Litigant’s argument, the court decided to review the inventory approval because appellate issues should be liberally construed so the right to appeal is not lost. After examining the evidence, the court determined that the trial court did not err in approving the inventory.

Moral: A person dissatisfied with the court’s approval of an inventory should take action in a timely manner and clearly indicate the court order to which the person is objecting.