Johnson v. Johnson, 8910
| Decision Date | 18 September 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 8910,8910 |
| Parties | Temple JOHNSON, Jr., Appellant, v. Lola Juanita JOHNSON, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Garner, Vickers & Purdom (Thomas J. Purdom), Lubbock, for appellant.
Griffith & Brister (Thomas J. Griffith), Lubbock, for appellee.
Temple Johnson, Jr., appeals from a judgment awarding his former wife, Lola Juanita Johnson, two thousand dollars for unpaid child support decreed by a prior judgment. No reversible error is demonstrated from the record brought to this court. Affirmed.
Temple and Lola Juanita agreed to a modification of the child support Temple had been ordered to pay by the Court of Domestic Relations, Nueces County. That court entered the agreement as its judgment which, as material here, stated:
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiff, Temple Johnson, shall contribute to the support of the minor children, Temple Dean Johnson, Phyllis Ann Johnson, and Russell Lane Johnson, in the sum of Three Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($325.00) per month, payable at the rate of One Hundred Sixty-Two and 50/100 Dollars ($162.50) on the first and fifteenth of each month, commencing the 15th day of October, 1973, such sums to be paid through the Wife and Child Support office of Nueces County, Texas, and it is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that when Temple Dean Johnson has attained the age of eighteen years, that this support shall reduce to a monthly support of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00), payable for the support of the remaining two children, payable at the rate of One Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($125.00) twice monthly as provided above . . . .
After Temple Dean reached the age of eighteen years, Temple paid the $250 monthly support payments until Phyllis Ann became eighteen. At that time, Temple began paying a lesser sum.
Shortly thereafter, Lola Juanita instituted this suit in a district court in Lubbock County. By this action, she sought a judgment for all delinquent child support payments decreed under the prior judgment at the rate of $250 per month.
Following an evidential hearing, the trial court found that Temple was ordered by the Nueces County Court of Domestic Relations to make child support payments for the support of the minor children, including Russell Lane, in the amount of $250 a month, that Temple had not paid as ordered, and that $2,000 was unpaid and owing. Judgment for $2,000 was rendered accordingly.
Appealing without submitting a statement of facts, Temple advances two points of error. The trial court erred, he contends, first in finding that he was ordered to pay $250 a month for the support of one child, and second, in finding that the child support judgment was enforceable and not so vague and indefinite as to be unenforceable.
The child support judgment was certain as long as both Phyllis Ann and Russell Lane were less than eighteen years of age, but the judgment became ambiguous when Russell Lane was the only child under the age of eighteen. See Ex parte Slavin, 412 S.W.2d 43 (Tex.1967). The certain...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Biaza v. Simon
...to contracts. See Acosta v. Acosta, 836 S.W.2d 652, 654 (Tex.App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied); Haworth, 795 S.W.2d at 298; Johnson v. Johnson, 572 S.W.2d 364, 365 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, no writ). The judgment in this case was clearly an agreed or consent judgment. 6 The judgment itse......
-
Miller v. Miller
...of the judgment and the surrounding circumstances, which may be clarified through the admission of extrinsic evidence. Johnson v. Johnson, 572 S.W.2d 364, 366 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, no writ). Since the divorce decree does not expressly dispose of the InteCom stock, but does expressly......
-
Boyett v. Boyett, B14-89-00953-CV
...v. Bates, 406 S.W.2d 419, 420 (Tex.1966). Extrinsic evidence is admissible to clarify the surrounding circumstances. Johnson v. Johnson, 572 S.W.2d 364, 366 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, no Appellant's contentions, if true, clearly show a unilateral mistake on his part in providing the spec......
-
Richey v. Bolerjack
...e.). In short, a judgment must be sufficiently definite and certain to permit its enforcement by contempt or summary process. Johnson v. Johnson, 572 S.W.2d 364 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo 1978, no writ); see Ex parte Slavin, supra. Upon applying the foregoing rules to the case at bar, it is obv......