Humphreys v. Humphreys
| Decision Date | 28 June 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 3981,3981 |
| Citation | 359 S.W.2d 103 |
| Parties | Oscar HUMPHREYS, Jr., Appellant, v. Kyle HUMPHREYS et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Riley, Jones, Boyd & Lovelace, O. F. Jones, III, Waco, for appellant.
Carl Walker, Jr., Houston, for appellees.
Oscar Humphreys, Jr., plaintiff, brought this suit against defendant, who are the brothers and sister of his father, Oscar Humphreys, Sr., deceased, to recover his father's share of the estates of Sandy and Hester Humphreys, both deceased, who were his father's parents.
Plaintiff contends he is the legitimate son of Oscar Humphreys, Sr. and Hazel Parker Humphreys. It is stipulated that if plaintiff is entitled to recover, his interest is a 1/6th undivided interest in the properties of Sandy and Hester Humphreys.
Trial was to the Court without a jury, which after hearing, entered judgment that plaintiff take nothing. The Trial Court filed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, pertinent of which are:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1) Oscar Humphreys, Sr. never entered into a common law marriage with Hazel Parker.
2) Hazel Parker was lawfully married to Ernest Winn in 1926 and remained his lawful wife until her death.
3) Oscar Humphreys, Jr. is not the legitimate son of Oscar Humphreys, Sr., deceased.
1) Oscar Humphreys, Sr. and Hazel Parker never entered any type of marriage relationship.
2) Oscar Humphreys, Jr. is not the legitimate son of Oscar Humphreys, Sr.
3) Oscar Humphreys, Jr. is not entitled to the relief prayed for in his petition.
Plaintiff appeals, contending that the Trial Court erred in entering judgment on the ground that he was not the legitimate son of Oscar Humphreys, Sr.
It is undisputed that plaintiff is the son of Oscar Humphreys, Sr. and Hazel Parker Humphreys, both deceased; that they were living together as man and wife, before, at the time of, and for long after plaintiff's birth; that plaintiff's birth certificate dated July 1930, shows him to be legitimate; that plaintiff's mother's first husband had gone to California before she commenced living with plaintiff's father, and she believed that she had been divorced by him, having heard that he had married a girl named Clara, in California. There is no evidence that plaintiff's mother and her former husband were not divorced.
The essential elements of a common law marriage are: 1) an express or implied agreement to enter into marriage; 2) cohabitation as husband and wife; 3) holding out to the public as being married. Grigsby v. Reib, 105 Tex. 597, 153 S.W. 1124, L.R.A.1915E, 1; Cain v. Caine, Tex.Civ.App., (n. w. h.) 314 S.W.2d 137. The evidence is undisputed that all of these elements existed between plaintiff's father and mother.
In Texas, the presumption of validity of a marriage duly shown to have been contracted, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whaley v. Peat
...it was entered into pursuant to a marriage ceremony.' See also Texas Employers' Insurance Association v. Elder, supra. In Humphreys v. Humphreys, 359 S.W.2d 103, the Court of Civil Appeals at Waco, in a case having a similar fact situation as this, held Section 42 of the Probate Code applic......
-
Humphreys v. Humphreys
...divorced from Ernest Winn, Section 42 of the Texas Probate Code, V.A.T.S. would entitle plaintiff to inherit from and through his father. 359 S.W.2d 103. The elements of a common law marriage are: (1) an agreement presently to be husband and wife; (2) living together as husband and wife; an......