Endick v. Endick
| Decision Date | 16 May 1884 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 4976. |
| Citation | 61 Tex. 559 |
| Parties | LIZZIE ENDICK v. CHARLES ENDICK. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from Callahan. Tried below before the Hon. T. B. Wheeler
J. E. Thomas, for appellant.
No briefs on file for appellee.
This is an action for divorce, based on many averments of cruelty exercised by the husband towards the wife. There is no statement of facts contained in the transcript, and the errors assigned relate to the exclusion of evidence offered and to supposed defects in the charge of the court.
Under a long line of decisions, the rule has been fixed that, in the absence of a statement of facts, the correctness of charges given will not be considered, unless, under no facts which might have been proved under the pleadings, could the charge have been correct. Pfeuffer v. Maltby, 54 Tex., 459;Lockett v. Schurenberg, 60 Tex., 610.
Moreover, in this case, the assignments go, not so much to the correctness of the charge as given, as to supposed want of fullness in the charge; in such case it is the duty of the person who is of the opinion that a charge is not so full as it ought to be, to ask a further charge.
The bills of exception taken to the exclusion of evidence do not state the objections which were urged to the evidence, nor the grounds on which it was excluded. In such case, and especially so when there is no statement of facts, rulings of a court in excluding evidence will not be considered. Thompson v. Callison, 27 Tex., 438;Lockett v. Schurenberg, 60 Tex., 610 (3 T. L. R., 98); Whitehead v. Foley, 28 Tex., 268.
The same matters may have been proved by other evidence introduced in the case, so far as we can know from the record, and if so, no injury may have resulted from the ruling of the court even if erroneous.
The desire of the husband to get possession of the child may, so far as we can know without a statement of facts, have been laudable and in every respect justified; if so, proof of such desire and of attempts to accomplish such a purpose could have had no weight in favor of the appellant. If the contrary was true, and the evidence therefore relevant on the question of cruelty, that should have been made in some way to appear; for in the absence of some such showing all presumptions must be indulged in favor of the correctness of the ruling of the court below.
If the rejection of the record, showing a conviction of the husband of an assault on the wife, had upon his plea of guilty, was properly presented in the bill of exceptions, we are not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rader v. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co.
...v. Foley, 28 Tex. 268; Johnson v. Crawl, 55 Tex. 571; Underwood v. Coolgrove, 59 Tex. 165; Lockett v. Schurenberg, 60 Tex. 610; Endick v. Endick, 61 Tex. 559; Franklin v. Tiernan, 62 Tex. 92; Railway v. Gage, 63 Tex. 568; Kolp v. Specht, 11 Tex. Civ. App. 685, 33 S. W. 714; Cunningham v. Ho......
-
Stratton v. Riley
...will not be considered by an appellate court, as has been repeatedly held by the courts of Texas. Bonart v. Waag, 61 Tex. 33; Endick v. Endick, 61 Tex. 559; Franklin v. Tiernan, 62 Tex. 92; Railway v. Gage, 63 Tex. 568; Arambula v. Sullivan, 80 Tex. 615, 16 S. W. 436. The question asked cou......
-
Fasken v. Fasken
...communications was never existent as relating to divorce actions, in addition to which, as pointed out by the Supreme Court in Endick v. Endick, 61 Tex. 559, the purpose in the use of the phrase was to guard against the procurement of collusive or fraudulent decrees of Thirty years later, i......
-
American Nat. Ins. Co. v. Nussbaum
...of this court which hold that a bill which fails in this particular should not be considered. Bonart v. Wang, 61 Tex. 33; Endick v. Endick, 61 Tex. 559, and cases cited; Willis v. Donac, 61 Tex. 588; Franklin v. Tieman, 62 Tex. 92; Railway Co. v. Gage, 63 Tex. 568; Shoe Co. v. Ferrill, 68 T......