Grisham v. Grisham
| Decision Date | 26 February 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 3074,3074 |
| Citation | 255 S.W.2d 891 |
| Parties | GRISHAM v. GRISHAM. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
C. O. McMillan, Stephenville, Truman E. Roberts, Hico, for appellant.
H. W. Allen, Hamilton, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a nonjury trial of a divorce suit which was grounded upon allegations of cruel treatment. After hearing the pleadings and evidence the court below rendered a decree granting appellee a divorce and awarding to him the title and possession of a Studebaker automobile. Under the two points upon which her appeal is based, appellant says the court erred (1) in granting appellee a divorce and (2) in awarding the automobile to him because the evidence was insufficient to show cruel treatment or to show that the automobile was the separate property of appellee.
Art. 4629 of Vernon's Tex.Civ.Stats. authorizes a decree of divorce where either party to the marriage is guilty of excesses, cruel treatment, or outrages toward the other, 'if such ill treatment is of such a nature as to render their living together insupportable.' Cruel treatment, within the meaning of this statute, is a relative term of variable degrees. It may consist of innumerable acts or combinations of misconduct. The painful effect of such treatment, whether physical or mental, as well as the degree of intensity thereof, depends in large measure upon the nature, extend and duration of the overt acts of which it consists and the circumstances under which such acts are committed. Consequently, a correct decision as to whether such ill treatment is of such a nature as to render the living together of the spouses insupportable in any given case is dependent upon all the attendant circumstances of the case. In the early case of Eatman v. Eatman, 75 Tex. 473, 12 S.W. 1107, 1108, the Supreme Court said: . While it is well settled under the decisions of our courts that the overt acts constituting legal cruelty must be established by full, clear and satisfactory evidence before a divorce can properly be granted upon that ground, a determination as to the quantum and weight of evidence necessary to meet this test involves the sound exercise of broad discretionary powers.
The evidence in this case shows that the parties were married on July 27, 1950. At that time appellant was about 56 years of age and appellee was 59 years of age, each having grown children by prior marriages. On May 14, 1951, appellee suffered a heart attack from which he was confined continuously thereafter to his bed, under orders from his doctor, until after the parties permanently separated on July 30, 1951. According to the testimony of appellee, he and his wife began to have difficulties over financial matters shortly after their marriage, it being his contention that his wife was spending too much of his money. He testified fully and in detail as to the amount of money he had in the bank at the time of his marriage, the amount he thereafter earned and collected prior to the time he became seriously ill, and the amount he had left at the time of their separation. He further testified in effect that prior to his illness his wife refused him permission to drive the Studebaker automobile in controversy; that after his illness she drew checks against his bank account without his consent, and when he caused a part of his balance to be withdrawn from the bank and brought to him for safe-keeping, he told her to put the money in his coat pocket on 'the right post of the bed and she said, no, I will take your money and put it in my room, etc.'; that his wife would not stay at home during his illness and would irritate him by getting up and leaving him in his helpless condition when he told her he wanted to talk with her; that the treatment which he received from her was injurious to his health,
In regard to the automobile in dispute, appellee testified that he tried to make a deal with ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cameron v. Cameron
...898 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1961, writ dism'd); McCart v. McCart, 275 S.W.2d 155, 157 (Tex.Civ.App.--Fort Worth 1955, no writ); Grisham v. Grisham, 255 S.W.2d 891, 893 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1953, no writ); Hamm v. Hamm, 159 S.W.2d 183, 185-86 (Tex.Civ.App.--Fort Worth 1942, no writ); Dale v. Dale......
-
Milligan v. Milligan, 12842
...were proved. McCullough v. McCullough, 120 Tex. 209, 36 S.W.2d 459; Mobley v. Mobley, Tex.Civ.App., 263 S.W.2d 794; Grisham v. Grisham, Tex.Civ.App., 255 S.W.2d 891; Hogue v. Hogue, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d Most of the trial concerned the small amount of property claimed by the parties. The......
-
Ferguson v. Ferguson
...render their further living together as husband and wife insupportable. 15-A Tex.Jur., Divorce and Separation, Sec. 10; Grisham v. Grisham, Tex.Civ.App., 255 S.W.2d 891; Hogue v. Hogue, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d 673; Ingham v. Ingham, Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W.2d 409; Best v. Best, Tex.Civ.App.,......
-
Piro v. Piro
...p. 550, Divorce and Separation, Note 14; Scott v. Ft. Worth Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 125 S.W.2d 356, error dism.; Grisham v. Grisham, Tex.Civ.App., 255 S.W.2d 891. At the time the judgment appealed from was rendered, the judgment in the compensation case had been settled and the $3,000 paid......