Braddock v. Taylor, 8345
| Decision Date | 15 November 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 8345,8345 |
| Citation | 592 S.W.2d 40 |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Marianne BRADDOCK et al., Appellants, v. Janice L. TAYLOR, Appellee. |
James W. Shoff, II and Robert C. Cowan, San Antonio, for appellants.
Levey & Goldstein, San Antonio, for appellee.
This is a suit on bill of review, to set aside a default judgment in a judgment declaring heirship. The bill of review was brought by Janice L. Taylor, as plaintiff, against Marianne Braddock and Dawn Elizabeth Taylor, a minor whose guardian is Dana L. Taylor.
Trial was to the court without a jury which granted the bill of review, set aside the default judgment, and declared that Janice L. Taylor was David E. Taylor's wife at the time of the latter's death, from which defendants below, Marianne Braddock, Dawn Elizabeth Taylor, and guardian Dana L. Taylor perfect this appeal.
Appellants first contend the trial court erred in granting the bill of review and setting aside the default judgment because appellee's failure to answer appellants' heirship suit on time was due to the fault of her attorney, citing Alexander v. Hagedorn, 148 Tex. 565, 226 S.W.2d 996 (1950), and Brothers Department Store, Inc. v. Berenzweig, 333 S.W.2d 445 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1960, writ ref'd n. r. e.), and others.
Appellee contends she took the citation to her attorney, who had ten days to answer. On answer day, November 7, 1977, her attorney was ill and called his office, had one secretary send the other secretary to file the answer at the Bexar County Courthouse. The secretary messenger left in time at 9:30 A.M. but didn't actually file the answer until 10:06 A.M., six minutes late.
The cases cited by appellants do not, we believe, control this situation. Tex.Prob.Code Ann. § 31 (Vernon 1956) provides:
"Any person interested may, by a bill of review filed in the court in which the probate proceedings were had, have any decision, order, or judgment rendered by the court, or by the judge thereof, revised and corrected on showing error therein . . . and no bill of review shall be filed after two years have elapsed from the date of such decision, order, or judgment. . . ."
In Hamilton v. Jones, 521 S.W.2d 350, 353 (Tex.Civ.App. Houston (1st Dist.) 1975, writ ref'd n. r. e.), the court stated:
"The ordinary rules as to diligence in making motions for new trials and appealing from the judgment complained of do not apply in a bill of review under Article 31 of the Probate Code."
We believe the court was correct in setting aside the default judgment, and overrule appellants' points directed to his action.
Appellants next contend the court erred in holding that appellee was the common-law wife of the deceased.
The facts are these: Appellee and deceased began living together and holding themselves out as husband and wife in Texas. Texas, of course, recognizes common-law marriages. At that time deceased was already married. Appellee and deceased then moved to California and continued their relationship. Deceased obtained a divorce from his wife and subsequently died in the State of California.
Appellee insists that she qualified as the deceased's common-law wife under Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 2.22 (Vernon 1975), which provides:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In the Matter of The Marriage of J.B. And H.B. In Re State
...claim of common-law marriage to the extent it was based on conduct that took place in California. See Braddock v. Taylor, 592 S.W.2d 40, 42 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.).3 In the other, the question presented was whether a decedent had entered a valid common-law marriage w......
-
De Leon v. Perry
...determined by the law of the place where it is celebrated rather than the law of the place where suit is filed.”); Braddock v. Taylor, 592 S.W.2d 40, 42 (Tex.Civ.App.1979) (same). Therefore, even if Texas itself would not allow a particular marriage to occur within its borders, that marriag......
-
In re Estate of Loveless
...of the place a marriage purportedly occurred to determine the validity of the ceremony. See, e.g., Braddock v. Taylor, 592 S.W.2d 40, 42 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.). In Seth v. Seth, 694 S.W.2d 459, 462 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1985, no writ), the court of appeals applied ch......
-
Graco Robotics, Inc. v. Oaklawn Bank
...writ ref'd n.r.e.). Without such proof, we must presume that Michigan law is the same as Texas law. Braddock v. Taylor, 592 S.W.2d 40, 42 (Tex.Civ.App.--Beaumont 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.). GRI also contends that it is entitled to prejudgment interest on its contract A prevailing plaintiff ma......
-
§ 2.03 Establishing a Valid Marriage
...Conflicts in a Nutshell, at 121 et seq. (1974). Cf., Restatement (Second) of Conflicts, § 283(1). See generally, Braddock v. Taylor, 592 S.W.2d 40 (Tex. Civ. App. 1979.) See also, Weintraub, Commentary on the Conflict of Laws, pp. 222 et seq. (1980). See Ma v. Ma, 18 Fam. L. Rep. (BNA) 1307......