Young v. Young, 7621.
Decision Date | 24 June 1931 |
Docket Number | No. 7621.,7621. |
Citation | 41 S.W.2d 367 |
Parties | YOUNG v. YOUNG. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Williamson County; Harry A. Dolan, Judge.
Divorce suit by Willie Emma Young against C. L. Young. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Allen & Wofford, of Taylor, for appellant.
D. B. Wood, of Georgetown, for appellee.
Appellant sued appellee for divorce, alleging cruel treatment as grounds therefor; also alleging that July 1, 1920, appellee was adjudged to be of unsound mind and has continuously remained so, and is now confined in the State Hospital for Insane at Austin; but that the acts of cruelty relied upon for divorce occurred while appellee was sane and prior to the time he was adjudged insane.
The trial court sustained all facts above alleged; but refused the divorce on the ground that the present divorce statutes prohibit the granting of a divorce while either spouse is insane; hence this appeal.
The question of whether a divorce may be granted while either spouse is insane has arisen from the fact that the codifiers of the 1925 Revised Statutes grouped all grounds for divorce provided in articles 4631, R. S. 1911, with the provisions and limitations of articles 4632, R. S. 1911, as amended in 1913, in article 4629, R. S. 1925, prefacing this article with the following language: "Except where the husband or wife is insane, a divorce may be decreed in the following cases" (here follow the five grounds for divorce).
In the case of Wilemon v. Wilemon, 112 Tex. 586, 250 S. W. 1010, the Supreme Court construed articles 4631 and 4632, as amended in 1913, holding that a divorce might be granted against an insane spouse where the grounds therefor arose prior to insanity, except in cases where the ground for divorce was the ten-year separation statute.
The history of the above statutes and the court decisions thereon are reviewed by Judge Speer in his recent book on the Law of Marital Rights in Texas, and the following language of section 607 states our conclusion that a divorce may not now be granted where either spouse is insane:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Barber v. Federal Land Bank of Houston
...of this State prohibited a divorce where either spouse was insane. R.S. of Texas, Art. 4629 (prior to 1941 amendment); Young v. Young, Tex.Civ.App., 41 S.W.2d 367. So, if Edward Letcher Barber were either plaintiff or defendant on the date the divorce was granted and was also insane the dec......
-
Hopkins v. Hopkins
...510 S.W.2d 29 (Tex.Civ.App.--Beaumont 1974, no writ); Pappas v. Pappas, 146 S.W.2d 1115 (Tex.Civ.App.--Fort Worth 1941, no writ); Young v. Young, 41 S.W.2d 367 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1931, no writ). It is not error for a Texas Court rendering a decree of divorce to apply the no fault divorce......
-
Gaines v. Gaines, 12185
...to becoming insane. Powell v. Powell, Tex.Civ.App., 199 S.W.2d 285; Robinson v. Robinson, Tex.Civ.App., 199 S.W.2d 256; Young v. Young, Tex.Civ.App., 41 S.W.2d 367; Jordan v. Jordan, Tex.Civ.App., 257 S.W. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. ...
-
Powell v. Powell, 4425.
...insane; the controlling fact, requiring that the divorce be denied, was the defendant's insanity when the suit was tried. Young v. Young, Tex.Civ.App., 41 S.W.2d 367. However, in 1941, Art, 4629, R.S. 1925, was amended by the statute to which we referred above. Under this amendment, the exc......