Jacobs v. Jacobs, No. C-2977

CourtSupreme Court of Texas
Writing for the CourtRAY
Citation687 S.W.2d 731
PartiesRoy Livingston JACOBS, Jr., Petitioner, v. Ellen English JACOBS, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. C-2977
Decision Date03 April 1985

Page 731

687 S.W.2d 731
Roy Livingston JACOBS, Jr., Petitioner,
v.
Ellen English JACOBS, Respondent.
No. C-2977.
Supreme Court of Texas.
April 3, 1985.

Crady & Peden, Douglas S. Johnston, Houston, for petitioner.

Burta Rhoads Raborn and Martha Bourne, Houston, for respondent.

RAY, Justice.

This is a divorce case in which only the property division is challenged on appeal. The court of appeals, after finding that the trial court had erred in determining what was properly a part of the community estate, reversed and rendered judgment as to part of the property division; reversed and remanded as to another part; and affirmed the trial court's judgment as to the remainder. 669 S.W.2d 759. We reverse that part of the court of appeals judgment which limits the remand to specific properties, substitute therefor a remand of the entire community estate for a new division and affirm the remainder of

Page 732

the judgment. We hold that a court of appeals must remand the entire community estate for a new division when it finds reversible error which materially affects the trial court's "just and right" division of the property.

The trial court found the value of the community estate to be between $1,300,000 and $1,500,000. About one-half of this value was attributable to reimbursement claims. The trial court found the community estate entitled to reimbursement for the time, toil and effort expended by husband on behalf of his separate property corporation, for certain community expenditures which benefited husband's separate estate and for certain income earned by husband, but diverted from the community estate to third parties.

Husband appealed the property division contending that the trial court had erred in awarding reimbursement to the community estate, had mischaracterized certain property and had erred in awarding wife her attorney's fees upon appeal. The court of appeals held that the trial court had erred in the following respects: (1) by awarding reimbursement to the community estate for the time, toil and effort of husband on behalf of his separate property corporation, (2) by awarding reimbursement to the community estate for income allegedly due husband, but diverted by him to third parties, (3) by characterizing as wholly community property certain properties in which husband had a separate property interest, (4) by characterizing as wife's separate property certain properties belonging to the community estate, and (5) by awarding wife her attorney's fees on appeal...

To continue reading

Request your trial
225 practice notes
  • Wiggains v. Reed (In re Wiggains), CASE NO. 13-33757-SGJ-7
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Texas
    • April 6, 2015
    ...limited his interest in the Homestead to 50% and gave up the possibility that he could be entitled to more. See e.g., Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 733 (Tex. 1985) (holding that only community property is subject to division; a spouse cannot be divested of his or her separate property).......
  • Wiggains v. Reed (In re Wiggains), CASE NO. 13-33757-SGJ-7
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Texas
    • April 27, 2015
    ...limited his interest in the Homestead to 50% and gave up the possibility that he could be entitled to more. See e.g., Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 733 (Tex. 1985) (holding that only community property is subject to division; a spouse cannot be divested of his or her separate property).......
  • Kramer v. Kastleman, NO. 14–1038
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • January 27, 2017
    ...order when possession is contested and a party requests findings).14 Id. at *3–4.15 Id. at *4.16 Id. at *4 n.6.17 See Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 732 (Tex. 1985) ("[A] court of appeals must remand the entire community estate for a new division when it finds reversible error which mate......
  • Welder v. Welder, No. 13-89-222-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • May 24, 1990
    ...point of error, appellant complains that the overall division of the community property was an abuse of discretion. In Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731 (Tex.1985), the Texas Supreme Court directed courts of appeals to remand the entire community estate for a new division when reversible err......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
225 cases
  • Wiggains v. Reed (In re Wiggains), CASE NO. 13-33757-SGJ-7
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Texas
    • April 6, 2015
    ...limited his interest in the Homestead to 50% and gave up the possibility that he could be entitled to more. See e.g., Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 733 (Tex. 1985) (holding that only community property is subject to division; a spouse cannot be divested of his or her separate property).......
  • Wiggains v. Reed (In re Wiggains), CASE NO. 13-33757-SGJ-7
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Texas
    • April 27, 2015
    ...limited his interest in the Homestead to 50% and gave up the possibility that he could be entitled to more. See e.g., Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 733 (Tex. 1985) (holding that only community property is subject to division; a spouse cannot be divested of his or her separate property).......
  • Kramer v. Kastleman, NO. 14–1038
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • January 27, 2017
    ...order when possession is contested and a party requests findings).14 Id. at *3–4.15 Id. at *4.16 Id. at *4 n.6.17 See Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731, 732 (Tex. 1985) ("[A] court of appeals must remand the entire community estate for a new division when it finds reversible error which mate......
  • Welder v. Welder, No. 13-89-222-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • May 24, 1990
    ...point of error, appellant complains that the overall division of the community property was an abuse of discretion. In Jacobs v. Jacobs, 687 S.W.2d 731 (Tex.1985), the Texas Supreme Court directed courts of appeals to remand the entire community estate for a new division when reversible err......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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