in Re Candyce Zook
This text of in Re Candyce Zook (in Re Candyce Zook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-22-00590-CV
In re Candyce Zook
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial
court’s temporary orders finding no prima facie showing of an informal marriage in Relator’s
suit for divorce. To be entitled to a writ of mandamus in Texas, a relator must establish that
the ruling of the trial court constitutes a clear abuse of discretion. In re Frank Kent Motor Co.,
361 S.W.3d 628, 630 (Tex. 2012). When a marriage is put in issue, the burden is on the party
seeking support under an informal-marriage theory to establish at least a prima facie case of
marriage. Ex parte Threet, 333 S.W.2d 361, 364 (1960). In Texas, an informal marriage may
be proved by evidence establishing three elements: (1) an agreement to be married; (2) living
together as spouses; and (3) representing to others that the couple are married. Tex. Fam. Code
§ 2.401(a)(2). Having reviewed the petition and the record provided, we find the record
evidence in conflict as to the first of these three elements, and inconclusive as to the third.
Accordingly, the trial court was within its discretion to find no prima facie showing of an
informal marriage, and we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). __________________________________________ Thomas J. Baker, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly
Filed: October 7, 2022
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Candyce Zook, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-candyce-zook-texapp-2022.