Mial v. Mial
Decision Date | 10 November 1976 |
Docket Number | No. 6497,6497 |
Citation | 543 S.W.2d 736 |
Parties | B. MIAL, Appellant, v. R. MIAL, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
William Pate, El Paso, for appellant.
Sam Blackham, El Paso, for appellee.
This appeal is from a divorce decree which divided the community property, named Appellant, Mrs. Mial, managing conservator of the parties' two sons, named Appellee, Mr. Mial, possessory conservator with visitation rights, and fixed an obligation for monthly child support until each child is eighteen years old. We affirm.
The attorney representing the Appellant on the appeal only has filed an excellent brief presenting two points of error. First, it is contended that the trial Court erred in awarding Appellant only 20% Of the vested military retirement benefits of the Appellee, and in delaying the payment of such benefits until the Appellee retires from the Army. It is next contended that the trial Court erred in limiting the amount of the monthly child support payments to $200.00 per child for the two minor hemophiliac sons and in limiting such payments until each child becomes eighteen years old.
The case was tried to the Court without a jury. The testimony was not taken by a court reporter and we have no statement of facts. The trial Court complied with a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, and they were timely filed after the judgment was entered. In considering the two points of error under the record before us, the rule is that 4 McDonald, Texas Civil Practice, Sec. 16.10 at 29--30 (Rev.Vol.1971).
Justice Keith, in Ives v. Watson, 521 S.W.2d 930 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont 1975, writ ref'd n.r.e.), set forth the basic rules applicable to an appeal where no statement of facts is filed, but where the trial Court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law following a nonjury trial. He said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gomez v. Gomez, 1366
...808, 810 (Tex.Civ.App. Amarillo 1964, no writ); Dorman v. Cook, 262 S.W.2d 744 (Tex.Civ.App. Beaumont 1953, writ dism'd); See Mial v. Mial, 543 S.W.2d 736, 737 (Tex.Civ.App. El Paso 1976, no writ); Ives v. Watson, 521 S.W.2d 930 (Tex.Civ.App. Beaumont 1975, writ ref'd n. r. e.); Law v. Law,......
-
Poulter v. Poulter, 1120
...Article 14.05, Texas Family Code; Garza v. Fleming, 323 S.W.2d 152 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1959, writ ref'd n. r. e.); Mial v. Mial, 543 S.W.2d 736, 738 (Tex.Civ.App. El Paso 1976, n. w. h.); Neff v. Johnson, 391 S.W.2d 760, 762 (Tex.Civ.App. Houston 1965, n. w. h.). No such findings were......
-
Bexar County Criminal Dist. Attorney's Office v. Mayo, S.F. MAY
...536 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1986, no writ); Edwards v. Edwards, 534 S.W.2d 740, 741 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1976, no writ); Mial v. Mial, 543 S.W.2d 736, 737 (Tex.Civ.App.--El Paso 1976, no writ); 4 R. McDonald, Texas Civil Practice § 16.10, at 35 (1984 rev.). Erroneous conclusions of law a......
-
Texas Const. Group, Inc. v. City of Pasadena
...statement of facts, we are bound to review the correctness of any legal conclusions drawn from the facts found by the trial court. Mial v. Mial, 543 S.W.2d 736 (Tex.Civ.App.--El Paso 1976, no writ); Dutchover v. Dutchover, 334 S.W.2d 569 (Tex.Civ.App.--El Paso 1960, no Appellate review of a......