McAfee v. McAfee, A-3819

Decision Date04 February 1953
Docket NumberNo. A-3819,A-3819
Citation255 S.W.2d 185,152 Tex. 156
PartiesMcAFEE v. McAFEE.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

J. Manuel Hoppenstein, Dallas, for petitioner.

Burt Barr, Dallas, for respondent.

SMITH, Justice.

On July 28th, 1949, a judgment was rendered and entered in a cause numbered and styled 33947-Millicent Ann McAfee v. John M. McAfee, District Court, Dallas County, Texas, dissolving the bonds of matrimony between petitioner and respondent, and awarding the care and custody of their minor child, Dionne Hope McAfee, to petitioner. The judgment further ordered, adjudged and decreed that respondent pay to petitioner the sum of $160 per month for the support of said child, 'or until further ordered by the court and subject to the further orders of this court.'

On August 24, 1951, respondent filed a motion in the same case alleging that conditions had materially changed, in that, his income had been substantially reduced, and that the sum of $40 per week was more than sufficient to support the minor child. The petitioner filed her answer, and on the 5th day of December, 1951, the court, without the aid of a jury, after hearing the pleadings, evidence and argument of counsel, entered its judgment reducing the sum for the support of the child to $100 per month.

Petitioner perfected her appeal to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fifth Supreme Judicial District of Texas. That court sustained the motion of respondent to dismiss the appeal, holding that the judgment entered on December 5, 1951, was interlocutory 'and necessarily so, under Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 4639a, * * * is not appealable.' 250 S.W.2d 310, 311. This Court had granted a writ of error.

Article 4639a reads as follows:

'Section 1. Each petition for divorce shall set out the name, age, sex and residence of each child under sixteen (16) years of age born of the marriage sought to be dissolved, if any such child or children there be; and if there be no such child or children, then the petition shall so state. No Court having jurisdiction of suits for divorce shall hear and determine any such suit for divorce unless such information is set out in such petition or in each cause of action for divorce. Upon the trial of any such cause, and in the event a divorce is granted by the Court, if there are such minor children, it shall be the duty of such trial Court to inquire into the surroundings and circumstances of each such child or children, and such Court shall have full power and authority to inquire into and ascertain the financial circumstances of the parents of such child or children, and of their ability to contribute to the support of same, and such Court shall make such orders regarding the custody and support of each such child or children, as is for the best interest of same; and said Court may by judgment, order either parent to make periodical payments for the benefit of such child or children, until same have reached the age of sixteen (16) years, or, said Court may enter a judgment in a fixed amount for the support of such child or children, and such Court shall have full power and authority to enforce said judgments by Civil Contempt proceedings after ten...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Huff v. Huff
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • March 16, 1983
    ...Schwartz v. Jefferson, 520 S.W.2d 881, 887 (Tex.1975); see also Curtis v. Gibbs, 511 S.W.2d 263, 266 (Tex.1974); McAfee v. McAfee, 152 Tex. 156, 255 S.W.2d 185, 186 (1953). The only traditional distinction between final divorce decrees and other final judgments has been the remedies availab......
  • Red v. Red
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • March 9, 1977
    ...(1955). See also Schwartz v. Jefferson, 520 S.W.2d 881 (Tex.1975); Curtis v. Gibbs, 511 S.W.2d 263 (Tex.1974), and McAfee v. McAfee, 152 Tex. 156, 255 S.W.2d 185 (1953). As to child support, that judgment was fully performed and discharged on July 9, 1966, when Diana reached the age of 18 y......
  • Chambers v. Girls Haven of Orange
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • December 3, 1953
    ...as we think the present one was. The situation may be illustrated by Ex parte Roberts, 139 Tex. 644, 165 S.W.2d and McAfee v. McAfee, Tex.Sup., 255 S.W.2d 185. Kelly v. Page, Tex.Civ.App., 186 S.W.2d 735, is not in point on the facts. The custodian was not a party and the institution sued f......
  • Hollis v. Hollis
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • March 25, 1974
    ...circumstances and justice may require, upon notice to such parent as above provided for, or with his or her consent.' McAfee v. McAfee, 152 Tex. 156, 255 S.W.2d 185 (1953). However, the rule was derived from the statutory enactment making specific provisions for minor children affected by d......
  • 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