Flores v. Melo-Palacios, IV-D
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
| Citation | 921 S.W.2d 399 |
| Docket Number | IV-D,MELO-PALACIO,A,No. 13-94-149-CV,13-94-149-CV |
| Parties | Blanca Estella FLORES, and the Attorney General of Texas, The Texas TitleAgency, Appellants, v. Rafael Ernestoppellee. |
| Decision Date | 04 April 1996 |
Page 399
The Texas Title IV-D Agency, Appellants,
v.
Rafael Ernesto MELO-PALACIOS, Appellee.
Corpus Christi.
Rehearing Overruled May 16, 1996.
Page 400
Dan Morales, Attorney General, Austin, Jorge Vega, First Asst. Attorney General, Austin, Karen S. Guerra, Guerra & Guerra, McAllen, Rhonda Amkraut Pressley, Assistant Attorney General, Child Support Enforcement, Austin, for Appellants.
Jose E. Garcia, Scott Breitenwischer, Garcia & Ramirez, McAllen, Neil E. Norquest, Norquest & Brisack, McAllen, Chris A. Brisack, Norquest & Brisack, McAllen, for Appellee.
On appeal from the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
Before SEERDEN, C.J., and YANEZ and CHAVEZ, JJ.
YANEZ, Justice.
Appellant, Blanca Flores, filed an action against Rafael Melo-Palacios to register, enforce, and modify a Mexican decree for child support. The Attorney General, also an appellant and as the Texas agency providing child support services, filed a petition in intervention. Melo-Palacios filed a special appearance as to both appellants' pleadings challenging the trial court's personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied the Attorney General's intervention. Additionally, the trial court dismissed the action with prejudice, finding it had no personal jurisdiction over Melo-Palacios and no subject matter jurisdiction over the suit. The Attorney General appeals from the court's order denying his intervention and both appellants appeal from
Page 401
the dismissal of the action with prejudice. We reverse and remand.Flores and Melo-Palacios were divorced on October 19, 1981, in Monterrey, Mexico. The divorce decree provided that Flores would have custody of Ricardo, the child who is the subject of this suit, and ordered Melo-Palacios to pay 15% of his earnings for the support of Ricardo. All parties are citizens of Mexico. Flores and Ricardo have lived in Hidalgo County since 1986. Melo-Palacios obtained a United States L-1 business visa in December 1989.
On July 19, 1991, in Dallas, Texas, Melo-Palacios received service of Flores' original pleading which was an action to modify and enforce the Mexican divorce decree. Melo-Palacios filed a special appearance and a response to the motion subject to the special appearance. The court denied the special appearance. Flores subsequently filed a first amended suit affecting the parent-child relationship in which she sought a Texas order establishing the parent-child relationship between Melo-Palacios and Ricardo and requiring paternity tests. Flores also requested that appropriate orders be made for support of the child. Melo-Palacios filed an answer and moved for dismissal because he had never contested the issue of paternity. The trial court denied Melo-Palacios' motion to dismiss the paternity action.
On February 9, 1993, Flores filed a motion seeking to register the Mexican divorce decree in Texas. On April 6, 1993, the parties purportedly agreed to the entry and registration of the foreign decree. Although an entry on the docket sheets shows an agreement as to the registration of the foreign decree, the record shows no court order confirming the registration. Flores filed a second amended original petition on April 23, 1993, alleging that the Mexican divorce decree had already been registered by agreement of the parties, and requested enforcement and an upward modification of the foreign order. Flores did not reassert the paternity action in her second amended petition.
On February 11, 1993, the Attorney General filed a petition in intervention in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. The Attorney General sought to establish a Texas child support order. Melo-Palacios filed a special appearance in response. He also filed a motion for reconsideration of his special appearance to Flores' action. The court disallowed the Attorney General's intervention. Moreover, ruling that it lacked jurisdiction over Melo-Palacios and the lawsuit, the court dismissed the suit with prejudice. The appeal arises from these two rulings.
By point one, Flores contends that the trial court erred in dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction because the court obtained personal jurisdiction over Melo-Palacios once he received service of process while physically present in Texas. The Attorney General makes the same challenge in point 2B. Similarly, by her second point, Flores asserts that the trial court had personal jurisdiction over Melo-Palacios because he was a Texas resident at the time he was served with process. A trial court's refusal to exercise its jurisdiction over a suit affecting the parent-child relationship will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion. Creavin v. Moloney, 773 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1989, writ denied).
After a review of the facts, we find that Melo-Palacios was a resident of Texas when Flores served him with process seeking enforcement and modification of his child support obligations. In order to establish residency, a person must be living and physically present in a particular locality. San Patricio County v. Nueces County Hosp., 721 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1986, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Residence simply requires bodily presence as an inhabitant in a given place. Holt v. Drake, 505 S.W.2d 650, 652 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 1973, no writ).
Melo-Palacios rented a Dallas apartment for at least one year. His Texas driver's license shows the Dallas apartment as his address. He and his current wife lived in Dallas with their daughter while she attended a school in Dallas for one year. They attended a Dallas church and his wife applied for membership with the church. These facts demonstrate that Melo-Palacios was a Texas resident and was amenable to service
Page 402
of process when Flores sought enforcement and modification of child support. The trial court should not have dismissed the action for lack of personal jurisdiction over Melo-Palacios.Moreover, even if Melo-Palacios was not a Texas resident at the time he received service of process on Flores' motion to modify, he still would have come within the purview of the Texas courts' in personam jurisdiction. Texas Family Code § 11.051, which governs suits affecting the parent-child relationship, provides:
The court may also exercise personal jurisdiction over a person on whom service of citation is required ..., although the person is not a resident or domiciliary of this state, if:
(4) there is any basis consistent with the constitutions of this state and the United States for the exercise of the personal jurisdiction.
TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. § 11.051 (Vernon 1986) (currently codified at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In the Matter of The Marriage of J.B. And H.B. In Re State , No. 05-09-01170-CV.
...no pet.); Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 966 S.W.2d 573, 586 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (en banc); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Because appellee did not file a motion to strike the State's intervention, the trial court ......
-
Prostok v. Browning, No. 05-99-00826-CV.
...on its own motion. Guaranty Fed. Sav. Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 793 S.W.2d 652, 657 (Tex. 1990); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion in striking New NGC's intervention on its own mo......
-
Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 04-94-00837-CV
...by a motion to strike. Guaranty Federal Savings Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 793 S.W.2d 652, 657 (Tex.1990); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). However, a trial court abuses its discretion in striking a plea in intervention in the ......
-
In The Matter Of The Marriage Of J.B. And H.B. In Re State Of Texas, 05-09-01170-CV
...no pet.); Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 966 S.W.2d 573, 586 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (en banc); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Because appellee did not file a motion to strike the State's intervention, the trial cou......
-
Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 04-94-00837-CV
...by a motion to strike. Guaranty Federal Savings Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 793 S.W.2d 652, 657 (Tex.1990); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). However, a trial court abuses its discretion in striking a plea in intervention in the ......
-
In the Matter of The Marriage of J.B. And H.B. In Re State , 05-09-01170-CV.
...no pet.); Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 966 S.W.2d 573, 586 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (en banc); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Because appellee did not file a motion to strike the State's intervention, the trial court ......
-
Prostok v. Browning, 05-99-00826-CV.
...on its own motion. Guaranty Fed. Sav. Bank v. Horseshoe Operating Co., 793 S.W.2d 652, 657 (Tex. 1990); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion in striking New NGC's intervention on its own mo......
-
In The Matter Of The Marriage Of J.B. And H.B. In Re State Of Texas, 05-09-01170-CV
...no pet.); Ghidoni v. Stone Oak, Inc., 966 S.W.2d 573, 586 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 1998, pet. denied) (en banc); Flores v. Melo-Palacios, 921 S.W.2d 399, 404 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, writ denied). Because appellee did not file a motion to strike the State's intervention, the trial cou......
-
Civil Litigation
...jurisdiction over any party that is a resident or even temporarily present within the borders of Texas. [ Flores v. Melo-Palacios , 921 S.W.2d 399 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, no writ ) (personal service on a non-resident that voluntarily comes to the state).] • Consent. By contractual a......