# In re Guardianship of Endicott

Supreme Court of Texas, No. 25-0560

**In re Guardianship of Endicott, No. 25-0560, is before the Supreme Court of Texas. Key issue: On a granted motion to dismiss, the Court granted the petition in the Endicott guardianship, vacated the Tenth Court of Appeals' judgment and opinion, and remanded to the trial court without reaching the merits, after a guardianship order that had been challenged for defective service and unmet statutory requirements was itself vacated.**

Practice areas: trusts and estates, civil procedure

## Key issues

- On a granted motion to dismiss, the Court granted the petition in the Endicott guardianship, vacated the Tenth Court of Appeals' judgment and opinion, and remanded to the trial court without reaching the merits, after a guardianship order that had been challenged for defective service and unmet statutory requirements was itself vacated.

## Factual History
A Walker County court at law created a guardianship over the person and estate of Daniel Wyatt Endicott and named Robert Endicott guardian; Endicott's mother, Jessica Trisler, appealed (Petition for Review, PDF p. 7).

## Procedural History
The Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed on May 15, 2025 (10-23-00202-CV); Trisler petitioned for review June 30, 2025, arguing lack of personal jurisdiction over the proposed ward, disregarded lack of qualification by applicant's counsel, unmet statutory requirements, and approval of an unexecuted bond (Petition for Review, PDF pp. 7-8). An amicus brief was filed by the Texas Guardianship Association. Robert Endicott moved to dismiss September 30, 2025 because the order at issue had been vacated, and on February 6, 2026 the Court granted the motion in part: without argument or considering the merits it granted the petition, vacated the court of appeals' judgment and opinion, and remanded to the trial court; the mandate issued February 23 (docket).

## Issues Presented
As framed in the petition: whether the trial court acquired personal jurisdiction over the proposed ward, whether counsel's lack of qualification could be disregarded, whether statutory requirements for a guardianship were met, and whether a judge may approve an unexecuted bond (Petition for Review, PDF p. 8). The Court did not decide them.

## Legal Arguments
**Trisler (Petitioner):** the court of appeals negated procedural protections the Legislature created for proposed wards and its opinion conflicts with this Court's and other courts' decisions (Petition for Review, PDF pp. 7-8). The Court resolved the case on the motion to dismiss.

## Stated Reasons the Court Should Take the Case
Trisler argued the case is important to the jurisprudence because the opinion, if uncorrected, would be cited to disregard the statutory protections for proposed wards (Petition for Review, PDF p. 7).

## Practice Area Tags
trusts-and-estates, civil-procedure

## Procedural Posture/Vehicle
Petition for review from the Tenth Court of Appeals, granted, and disposed of on a motion to dismiss without argument (docket).

## Amicus Involvement
Texas Guardianship Association filed an amicus brief (docket).

## Disposition
Petition granted, judgment and opinion of the court of appeals vacated, and the case remanded to the trial court.

## Vote Breakdown
No separate writings noted.

---
Source: The SCOTX Report, https://scotxreport.com/cases/25-0560. AI-generated summary of the Court's opinion, orders and the parties' briefs, with pin cites to the page of each document; verify against the Court's own documents at search.txcourts.gov.