Ex Parte Norton
Decision Date | 12 June 1929 |
Docket Number | (No. 1299-5400.) |
Parties | Ex parte NORTON. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
John G. Wilson, of Dallas, for relator.
Frank Rawlings, of Fort Worth, for Mrs. Norton.
Statement of the Case.
This is an original habeas corpus proceeding in which relator, J. F. Norton, seeks release from an alleged restraint of his liberty. It appears from the contempt order and the record before us that on May 28, 1927, relator filed suit in the 101st district court of Dallas county, Tex., for a divorce against his wife, Mary Norton. Various proceedings were had in this suit not necessary to relate in this opinion. At some time prior to January 4, 1928, the wife, who contested the divorce and filed no cross-action for a divorce herself, filed a motion for alimony. On January 4, 1928, the relator and his wife both being present, the court heard the motion for alimony, and made an entry on his trial docket allowing the wife alimony in the sum of $15 per week, during the pendency of the divorce suit. This docket entry, so far as shown by the record, was never carried to the minutes of the court. At some time after January 7, 1928, the relator took the matter of payment of alimony up with the court, and the court instructed relator orally that he would suspend the payment of alimony until the hearing of the divorce suit. On February 15, 1929, the divorce suit was tried by jury, and judgment entered for the wife denying the relator a divorce. This judgment was set aside and a new trial ordered on April 6, 1929.
Immediately after the new trial was ordered, and on said date of April 6, 1929, the wife requested the court to hear and determine a motion for contempt she had theretofore filed on account of the failure of relator to pay alimony in accordance with the docket order of January 4, 1928. After said request and on that date, the court then and there entered the following decree in his minutes:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Dishman v. Gary
...on the docket of the 60th District Court. State ex rel. Hancock v. Ennis, Tex.Civ.App., 195 S.W.2d 151, ref. n. r. e.; Ex parte Norton, 118 Tex. 581, 17 S.W.2d 1041. In Norton's case above mentioned, the plaintiff, J. F. Norton, took a nonsuit under Article 2182 from which Rule 164 is taken......
-
Williams v. National Mortg. Co., 05-94-00685-CV
...State ex rel. Dishman v. Gary, 163 Tex. 565, 569-70, 359 S.W.2d 456, 458-59 (1962) (orig. proceeding) (citing Ex parte Norton, 118 Tex. 581, 585, 17 S.W.2d 1041, 1043 (1929) (orig. proceeding)); see also Strawder v. Thomas, 846 S.W.2d 51, 59 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1992, no writ); Ex part......
-
Ex parte Hooks, A--11688
...terms of the decree, or that summary measures will be taken to secure its payment.' Wright v. Wright was followed in Ex parte Norton, 118 Tex. 581, 17 S.W.2d 1041 (1929). In that case the trial court ordered a husband to make certain alimony payments during pendency of his divorce suit. He ......
-
Ex parte Helle
...Setoff, Counterclaim and Cross-Actions, §§ 4--6, 55--56, pp. 186--189, 259--263. In the case of Ex parte Norton, 118 Tex. 581, 17 S.W.2d 1041 (Tex.Com.App.1929, opinion adopted), it was held that the right of a plaintiff in a divorce case to take a non-suit and dismiss the cause was absolut......