Coss v. Coss
| Decision Date | 30 October 1918 |
| Docket Number | (No. 6178.) |
| Citation | 207 S.W. 127 |
| Parties | COSS et al. v. COSS. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Bexar County; J. T. Sluder, Judge.
Suit by Guadalupe Reyes Coss against Francisco Coss and others. From an order granting a temporary writ of injunction, defendants appeal. Remanded, with instructions.
Cobbs & Cobbs, of San Antonio, for appellants.
C. L. Bass, J. D. Martin, and A. J. Peeler, all of San Antonio, for appellee.
Appellee sought by this suit to obtain a divorce from her husband, Francisco Coss, and to recover from him and Guadalupe Ramos, it being alleged that he was living in adultery with the latter, certain diamond rings of the value of $4,000, her separate property, and her community interest in $50,000 cash, a large part of which, she alleged, was on deposit, in the name of appellants, in the Frost National Bank, the State National Bank, and Lacaud & Sons, in San Antonio, Tex. It was alleged that a portion of the money had been invested in a dairy business, near Kelly Field, Bexar county, Tex. It was alleged that appellee was married to Francisco Coss in the early part of the year 1916, and that they lived together as man and wife until August 27, 1918, when her husband abandoned her, and has since that time lived in adultery with Guadalupe Ramos. It was alleged that appellee had no property of any kind in her possession "for the support of herself and her boy child, who is one year and three months old, and is the son of the defendant Coss, and that the property sued for would be lost, removed and materially injured." A divorce and division of the community estate was prayed for and that a temporary injunction be issued restraining appellants from disposing of the property, from collecting the debts, and from paying debts, and also to restrain the banks named from paying any money or delivering any property to Francisco Coss or Guadalupe Ramos. The temporary writs of injunction were issued, and from the order granting them this appeal has been perfected.
The first and second assignments of error claim error because the allegations fail to show that appellee had resided in Bexar county for six months, and had been an actual bona fide inhabitant of Texas for twelve months next preceding the filing of the suit. So far as the suit for divorce is concerned, those objections might be good, but would have no pertinency or importance so far as the suit of appellee for her property is concerned. If qualified in other respects to maintain a suit against her husband for her separate estate or her interest in the community estate, it would not matter whether appellee had lived in Texas at all before she instituted her suit. She found her husband with the property in Bexar county, and if she could maintain the suit at all, she could maintain it without reference to residence or citizenship. The comity existing between states and nations sanctions the rule that an inhabitant of another state or another nation has free access to the courts for the redress of wrongs or the prosecution of rights. This disposes of all points sought to be advanced in the first and second assignments, and they are overruled.
The petition for injunction is verified as follows:
"I solemnly swear that I am the plaintiff in the above styled cause, and that the matters set forth in the foregoing petition are true, except where the nature of the facts is such that it appears from the petition that I acquired the knowledge of same from information, and as to such facts I solemnly swear that I have acquired such information from credible persons, and that I believe the same to be true."
The affidavit sufficiently indicates the matters sworn to as true and those sworn to on belief. The essential facts were stated to be true.
The authority of the wife to institute suit for her interest in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commissioner of Int. Rev. v. Chase Manhattan Bank
...273 S.W. 799; Martin v. McAllister, 1901, 94 Tex. 567, 63 S.W. 624, 56 L.R.A. 585; Stramler v. Coe, 1855, 15 Tex. 211; Coss v. Coss, Tex.Civ.App.1918, 207 S.W. 127. 14 Rogers v. Trevathan, 1887, 67 Tex. 406, 3 S.W. 569; Moss v. Helsley, 1883, 60 Tex. 426; Brown v. Pridgen, 1882, 56 Tex. 15 ......
-
Smith v. Womack
...wife alone is not so fundamentally defective that her petition will be disregarded and her suit treated as a nullity." In Coss v. Coss, 207 S. W. 127, by the San Antonio Court of Civil Appeals, Chief Justice Fly, in his usual emphatic way, "It would be intolerable and a blot upon the civili......
-
American Rio Grande Land & Irrigation Co. v. Karle
...words "the execution of a moneyed judgment." McNeal v. Waco, 89 Tex. 83, 33 S. W. 322; Twin City Co. v. Birchfield, 228 S. W. 616; Coss v. Coss, 207 S. W. 127. Under article 4654, Revised Statutes, the amount of the bond was within the sound discretion of the court, which has not been shown......
-
Davis v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 20499.
...19 See Allen v. Brewster, 172 S.W.2d 192 (Tex.Civ.App.1943, rev'd on other grounds, 142 Tex. 127, 176 S.W.2d 311 (1944); Coss v. Coss, 207 S.W. 127 (Tex.Civ. App.1918); Kemp v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 205 F.2d 857 (5th Cir. ...
-
REPUGNANT PRECEDENTS AND THE COURT OF HISTORY.
...265 P.2d 183, 189 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1954) ("This hollow, debasing, and degrading philosophy ... has spent its course."); Coss v. Coss, 207 S.W. 127, 128 (Tex. Civ. App. 1918) (deeming a rule against interspousal litigation "intolerable" and "a blot upon the civilization of our (130.) Sta......