Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, No. 4612

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
Writing for the CourtWILSON
Citation417 S.W.2d 592
Docket NumberNo. 4612
Decision Date22 June 1967
PartiesDoris Smith GRATEHOUSE, Appellant, v. Woodrow W. GRATEHOUSE, Appellee. . Waco

Page 592

417 S.W.2d 592
Doris Smith GRATEHOUSE, Appellant,
v.
Woodrow W. GRATEHOUSE, Appellee.
No. 4612.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.
Waco.
June 22, 1967.
Rehearing Denied July 13, 1967.

Butler, Binion, Rice, Cook & Knapp, Tom Alexander, Houston, for appellant.

F. W. Moore, Houston, for appellee.

OPINION

WILSON, Justice.

The question here is whether, as against appellant's contentions, the Harris County Court of Domestic Relations improperly granted a temporary injunction restraining defendant in a divorce case pending in that court from proceeding as plaintiff in a divorce action in the district court of another county.

Appellee husband filed a divorce suit in the Harris County Court on February 1, 1966. In May, 1966 appellant wife answered alleging generally lack of jurisdiction, estoppel by 'actions' in a Louisiana proceeding, condonation and recrimination. On August 24th of that year she filed a cross-action for divorce in the Harris County suit. September 7, 1966 appellant wife filed a divorce suit against appellee in the District Court of San Augustine County. The parties devote extensive discussion to Louisiana separation a mensa et thoro proceedings. They are not the subject of the prayer for injunction or the order.

The husband filed in the latter court on October 3rd a 'motion to the jurisdiction' alleging the essence of the foregoing facts, the prior pendency of the Harris County divorce action between the same parties, and the appearance of the wife therein.

Page 594

Copies of the pleadings in the first suit in Harris County were attached as exhibits. That plea was overruled by the San Augustine County District Court October 3, 1966 by an order which also directed custody of children and awarded child support. Within a week thereafter the husband filed another plea which he denominated a 'plea in abatement' in the San Augustine County case, and obtained a setting for its hearing on November 3rd.

The temporary injunction appealed from was granted by the court in the Harris County case on October 28th. 1

The wife's point is that, although the Harris County court had general jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief, the temporary injunction was not authorized here because the husband had 'an adequate remedy by plea in abatement' in San Augustine County, which was filed but not acted on before the injunction order was entered. Lancaster v. Lancaster (1956) 155 Tex. 528, 291 S.W.2d 303; and Powers v. Temple Trust Co., 124...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Ex parte Browne, No. B--5937
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • October 27, 1976
    ...and the remedies were different, so a plea in abatement by reason of a prior pending action would not lie. See Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592 (Tex.Civ.App.1967, no The purpose of the injunction by the 60th Judicial District Court was to avoid the disruption of the setting and tria......
  • City of El Paso v. Madero Development, No. 08-89-00322-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • January 4, 1991
    ...on and of the pleader's claims. It is to be "considered for all that it means instead of what it is called." Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1967, no writ); Tex.R.Civ.P. 71. Generally, there are three jurisdictional elements: (1) jurisdiction over the subject ma......
  • Longacre v. Wylie Independent School District, No. 11833
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
    • May 5, 1971
    ...the court in Taylor County prerequisite to granting of injunctive relief by the trial court in Travis County. Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592, Tex.Civ.App., Waco, 1967, no The trial court properly enjoined appellants in this cause to protect its jurisdiction by enjoining them from ......
3 cases
  • Ex parte Browne, No. B--5937
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • October 27, 1976
    ...and the remedies were different, so a plea in abatement by reason of a prior pending action would not lie. See Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592 (Tex.Civ.App.1967, no The purpose of the injunction by the 60th Judicial District Court was to avoid the disruption of the setting and tria......
  • City of El Paso v. Madero Development, No. 08-89-00322-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • January 4, 1991
    ...on and of the pleader's claims. It is to be "considered for all that it means instead of what it is called." Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1967, no writ); Tex.R.Civ.P. 71. Generally, there are three jurisdictional elements: (1) jurisdiction over the subject ma......
  • Longacre v. Wylie Independent School District, No. 11833
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
    • May 5, 1971
    ...the court in Taylor County prerequisite to granting of injunctive relief by the trial court in Travis County. Gratehouse v. Gratehouse, 417 S.W.2d 592, Tex.Civ.App., Waco, 1967, no The trial court properly enjoined appellants in this cause to protect its jurisdiction by enjoining them from ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT