Hale v. Hale, 8514
| Decision Date | 01 November 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 8514,8514 |
| Citation | 557 S.W.2d 614 |
| Parties | Robert Frank HALE, Jr., Appellant, v. Judy DeSanders HALE, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Dennis L. White, Edith L. James, Dallas, for appellant.
Larry F. Amerine, Rick W. Hightower, Biggers, Lloyd, Biggers, Beasley & Amerine, Dallas, for appellee.
The appellant, Robert Frank Hale, Jr., has perfected this appeal from the judgment entered in a divorce case. Appellee, Judy DeSanders Hale, does not complain of any ruling or action of the trial court.
The parties were married October 28, 1974. Appellee's father died in February, 1975, and in November of that year she purchased a residence in Dallas County, Texas, with a portion of her inheritance. The residence was extensively improved during coverture with a resultant substantial enhancement in value. Appellant concedes that the residence was purchased and improved with appellee's separate funds; however, he contends that the value of the residence was substantially enhanced by his labor, talents, contacts, influence and industry, and that appellee's separate estate should reimburse their community estate for the amount of the enhanced value attributable to his efforts. Appellant testified that he had expertise and experience in construction and construction related fields; he made $7.21 per hour as an employee for a construction and construction related firm; he was absent 320 hours from his job while assisting appellee in the remodeling of the residence; he expended a total of 350 hours on the remodeling project; a substantial saving was realized on the total cost of the remodeling due to his efforts, talents, and construction business contacts; and no community funds were used in purchasing or improving the residence. Appellee testified, in effect, that the value of the residence was not enhanced as a result of appellant's endeavors. The court, sitting without a jury, ordered that appellant should recover $1,120.00 from appellee. The record does not reflect the basis for this award, but in any event appellee did not file a cross-appeal.
The issue to be decided on appeal is whether or not a spouse who contributes community labor, talents, and industry to enhance the value of the other spouse's separate estate should be reimbursed for his community share of the enhanced value even though no community funds were used in payment of the costs of the improvements. We think not. In Dakan v. Dakan, 125 Tex. 305, 83 S.W.2d 620 (1935), it was held that:
". . . where a spouse improves his or her separate property with the funds belonging to the community estate, the other spouse, or his or her heirs, would be entitled to reimbursement out of his or her separate property, to the extent of their share of the community funds so used, and that their claim for such reimbursement is in the nature of a charge upon the property so improved."
This proposition of law has become one well recognized by later decisions. See Lindsay v. Clayman, 151 Tex. 593, 254...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vallone v. Vallone
...and affirm the judgment of the trial court. The holding of the court of civil appeals in this case conflicts with the holding in Hale v. Hale, 557 S.W.2d 614 (Tex.Civ.App.--Texarkana 1977, no writ). In Hale, the court held that a contribution of community labor should not be taken into acco......
-
Cockrill v. Cockrill
...apportioned to reimburse the community for its labor only if community funds were also used in making the improvements. Hale v. Hale, 557 S.W.2d 614 (Tex.Civ.App.1977). ...
-
Anderson v. Gilliland
...The language in Dakan has been interpreted to mean that the measure of reimbursement is whichever is less--enhancement or cost. Hale v. Hale, 557 S.W.2d 614, 615 (Tex.Civ.App.--Texarkana 1977, no writ); Trevino v. Trevino, 555 S.W.2d 792 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1977, no The trend sinc......
-
Deliberto v. Deliberto
...the chances of trade," suffered the consequence of having the entire enhancement credited to the community.12 To the extent that Hale v. Hale, 557 S.W.2d 614 (Ct. of Civ.App. of Tex.1977), and Tester v. Tester, 123 Ariz. 41, 597 P.2d 194 (Ct. of App. of Ariz.1979) differ from the prevailing......