# First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Vandygriff

> Court of Appeals of Texas · September 1, 1982 · 639 S.W.2d 492

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9646162

## Case

- **Full name:** FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, Et Al., Appellants, v. L. Alvis VANDYGRIFF, Savings and Loan Commissioner of Texas, Et Al., Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** September 1, 1982
- **Citations:** 639 S.W.2d 492; 1982 Tex. App. LEXIS 5134
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Powers
- **Judges:** Phillips, Shannon, Powers
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9646162

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding implicit command in predecessor to APA “that administrative adjudications be conducted with procedural regularity independent of result”

## Opinion text

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
POWERS, Justice.
The substance of appellees’ motion for rehearing amounts to an argument that our *501 decision has the result of invalidating “every move of every savings and loan office in Texas since the contested rule was first adopted in 1964.” Appellees do not offer an explanation of how this result follows from our decision. Rather, they content themselves with advancing this a priori notion as if it were a sanctified legal principle. A moment’s reflection will reveal it to have an opposite character.
Earlier orders by which the Commissioner approved the relocation of savings and loan offices are not subject to collateral attack, for such orders are specifically within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner to render. Texas Savings and Loan Act, Tex. Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 852a, § 2.18 (1964). The orders are therefore not void and may be set aside only in a direct proceeding brought for that purpose, even if they show on their face an absence of the required fact findings. Railroad Commission of Texas v. Roberdeau, 150 Tex. 506 , 242 S.W.2d 881 (1951). Nevertheless, the earlier orders are not subject to direct attack either, for it is now impossible to bring a suit for that purpose within the thirty days allowed by Section 11.12(2) of the Savings and Loan Act, supra, and Section 19(b) of APTRA. Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 6252-13a, § 19(b) (Supp.1982). Being subject to neither a direct nor a collateral attack, the Commissioner’s previous orders, approving the relocation of savings and loan offices, may be viewed only as valid and subsisting orders.
Appellees’ argument is without substance and their motion for rehearing is overruled.
Reversed and Remanded on Motion for Rehearing.
PHILLIPS, C. J., not participating.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9646162. Public record. Not legal advice.