Mitchell v. Mitchell

Decision Date31 October 1978
Docket NumberNo. 19635,19635
PartiesHarry Lawrence MITCHELL, Appellant, v. Nancy Elizabeth MITCHELL, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Linda S. Aland, Strother, Davis & Stanton, Dallas, for appellant.

Michael T. Everett, Everett, Law & HeLal, Dallas, for appellee.

ROBERTSON, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a nonjury trial obtained pursuant to Tex.Family Code Ann. § 14.09(c) (1975) against appellant, Harry Lawrence Mitchell, for arrearages in child-support payments. Appellant was ordered to pay child support of $600.00 per month subsequent to a 1971 divorce decree. Although appellant has paid child support continually since the decree, he has not paid the above stated amount. We hold that the claim of appellee, Nancy Elizabeth Mitchell, is not barred by laches or estoppel and accordingly, we affirm.

The trial court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law, but these are not challenged. Appellant presents two contentions on this appeal. First, he argues that the equitable doctrine of laches applies since appellee waited more than seven years to file her suit. Second, he claims that an oral agreement to reduce the amount of the child-support payments exists between appellee and himself, that he relied on this agreement, and thus, appellee is estopped from seeking recovery for any arrearages. Since the rule in Texas concerning the application of the doctrine of laches involves estoppel, K & G Oil Tool & Service Co. v. G & G Fishing Tool Service, 158 Tex. 594, 314 S.W.2d 782 (1958), we will consider these points together.

As a general rule, the doctrine of laches will not bar a suit short of the period set forth in the limitations statute unless some element of estoppel exists. K & G Oil Tool & Service Co. v. G & G Fishing Tool Service,supra. The appropriate statute of limitations in this case is Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 5532, a ten-year statute of limitations. Houtchens v. Matthews, 557 S.W.2d 581 (Tex.Civ.App. Fort Worth 1977, writ dism'd). The parties' divorces became final on February 11, 1971 and child support was set at that time. This suit was filed on October 9, 1977. Seven years and eight months has passed between the two, and thus laches does not apply unless an element of estoppel is present. The trial court's findings that appellee did not agree to any reduction in the amount of child support are unchallenged. We must accept these findings, McKenzie v. Carte, 385 S.W.2d 520 (...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Maksym v. Loesch
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 10 d2 Setembro d2 1991
    ...505 N.E.2d at 1061-62. It is really a doctrine of estoppel rather than a substitute for a statute of limitations. Mitchell v. Mitchell, 575 S.W.2d 311, 312 (Tex.Civ.App.1978). So the fact that Maksym sued Mrs. Loesch within the statutory period does not defeat the defense of laches: only th......
  • Huff v. Huff
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • 16 d3 Março d3 1983
    ...applicable as a matter of policy. Id. at 317-318. See, in contrast, for courts of appeals applying the ten-year statute, Mitchell v. Mitchell, 575 S.W.2d 311 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1978, no writ); Houtchens v. Matthews, 557 S.W.2d 581 (Tex.Civ.App.--Fort Worth 1977, writ We note at the outse......
  • Ex parte McNemee, 7024
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 13 d3 Agosto d3 1980
    ...Relator's answer in the trial Court. In Houtchens v. Matthews, 557 S.W.2d 581 (Tex.Civ.App.-Fort Worth 1977, writ dism'd), and Mitchell v. Mitchell, 575 S.W.2d 311 (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1978, no writ), it was held that under Tex. Family Code Ann. sec. 14.09(c) (1975), in actions to reduce un......
  • Ex parte Payne
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 15 d2 Janeiro d2 1980
    ...are not unmindful of the decisions in Houtchens v. Matthews, 557 S.W.2d 581 (Tex.Civ.App. Fort Worth 1977, writ dism'd), and Mitchell v. Mitchell, 575 S.W.2d 311 (Tex.Civ.App. Dallas 1978, no writ). In both of those cases the courts held that upon motion to reduce unpaid child support arrea......
  • 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