Snipes v. Snipes, 13431.

Decision Date02 August 1943
Docket NumberNo. 13431.,13431.
Citation174 S.W.2d 741
PartiesSNIPES v. SNIPES.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Dallas County; Paine L. Bush, Judge.

Suit for divorce by J. C. Snipes against Louise Brock Snipes, wherein judgment was entered divorcing the parties, awarding custody of the minor children to the defendant, and ordering plaintiff in accordance with written agreement approved by court to pay $50 per month to defendant for support of children until the younger attained majority. Upon plaintiff's failure to make monthly payments for children's support, defendant instituted a proceeding to recover unpaid instalments and those to accrue in the future. Judgment for wife, and J. C. Snipes appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Bonney & Paxton and Mart M. Wade, all of Dallas, for appellant.

Chrestman, Brundidge, Fountain, Elliott & Bateman, of Dallas, for appellee.

LOONEY, Justice.

J. C. Snipes sued his wife, Louise Brock Snipes, for divorce in Dallas County, cause No. 41244-E on the docket of the court below. Defendant answering prayed that plaintiff be adjudged to pay her alimony and a reasonable attorney's fee; prayed for the custody of their two minor children, a daughter 19 years of age and a son 16 years of age; alleged that the parties owned no community property, but that plaintiff owned a separate estate; prayed that he be compelled to file an inventory of his separate property and render full accounting as to his income and earnings, and that he be adjudged to pay the defendant stated amounts of money for the support of said minors until the younger reached his majority.

The parties settled their property rights before trial of the divorce suit. Plaintiff agreed in writing to pay the defendant a stated sum as alimony, and an attorney's fee; agreed that she should have custody of the minor children, and as aid for their support, "First Party (plaintiff) further agrees to pay to Second Party (defendant) for the use and benefit and for the support, maintenance and education of said two minor children, the sum of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) per month regularly on or before the 5th day of each month, until the youngest of said children shall become twenty-one years of age, the first monthly payment to be made on or before the 5th day of June, 1939, and a like monthly payment of $50.00 to be made on or before the 5th day of each successive month thereafter." The said agreement contained a provision that it should be made a part of the final judgment entered in the divorce suit.

On April 2, 1939, the court below rendered judgment divorcing the parties, set out in extenso the written agreement executed by plaintiff, reciting that defendant had waived her demand for an inventory and accounting of all plaintiff's property and income, had waived her demand that his separate property be impressed with a trust, finding the same just and fair to the parties; that plaintiff had paid defendant the amount of alimony and attorney's fee agreed upon, awarded the custody of the two minor children to the defendant, and the following: "It further appearing to the court that the plaintiff has paid a proper sum of money to the defendant for the support of said minor children pendente lite, and has on this date paid to the defendant for their support the sum of $50.00, and has agreed to pay a like sum to her each month, the first payment to be made June 5, 1939, which agreement is hereby approved, and the court being of the opinion that, considering the finances and economic situation of both parties and of said children, such monthly payment is fair, just and equitable, it is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the court that the plaintiff, J. C. Snipes, pay to the defendant,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Klaeveman v. Klaeveman, 10456
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 6 Marzo 1957
    ...is hypothecated or pledged as security for the performance of the agreement. This rule is recognized in the case of Snipes v. Snipes, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 741.' In the Snipes case by the Fort Worth Court a monetary judgment was sustained where the consideration for the agreement for chi......
  • Hutchings v. Bates
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 29 Julio 1965
    ...altered the obligation of the contract. Smith v. Blanton, Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W. 651. See also Newman v. Burwell, supra; Snipes v. Snipes, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 741. We are therefore constrained to hold that appellant's point of error number six should be and it is hereby The decision of......
  • Duke v. Duke
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 6 Octubre 1969
    ...614; Scott v. Fort Worth National Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 125 S.W.2d 356; Smith v. Blanton, Tex.Civ.App., 240 S.W. 651; Snipes v. Snipes, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 741.' See also the case of Morris v. Morris, Tex.Civ.App., 406 S.W.2d As late as March 1, 1967, the Supreme Court in the case of Fra......
  • Brady v. Hyman
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 10 Mayo 1950
    ...contractual obligations. The fact that the agreement is recorded as part of a judicial decree does not change the rule. Snipes v. Snipes, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W.2d 741. A contract was the basis of the property settlement and the child support provisions contained in the 1946 divorce decree. ......
  • 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