Wilson v. Wilson

88 S.W.2d 1086
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 12, 1935
DocketNo. 3296.
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 88 S.W.2d 1086 (Wilson v. Wilson) 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.

Bluebook
Wilson v. Wilson, 88 S.W.2d 1086 (Tex. Ct. App. 1935).

Opinion

HIGGINS, Justice.

This case presents a controversy over the custody of two small children of the relator, Arthur A. Wilson, and the respondent, Mrs. Theora Dell Wilson. The parties were divorced and in the divorce decree the custody of the children had been previously awarded to Mrs. Wilson.

Upon the close of relator’s evidence adduced in support of his application for the writ of habeas corpus, the respondent demurred to such evidence. The demurrer was sustained and the petition dismissed.

Opinion.

The evidence offered by relator raised an issue of fact as to whether it was to the best interest of the minors for them to remain in the custody of the respondent. This being true, the court erred in sustaining the demurrer, for such demurrer admitted every fact and conclusion which the evidence conduced to prove. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Templeton, 87 Tex. 42, 26 S.W. 1066; Hanna v. Atchison (Tex.Civ.App.) 141 S.W. 190; Combination Fountain Co. v. Rogers (Tex.Civ.App.) 186 S.W. 407.

However, we will not reverse and here render judgment in favor of the relator awarding custody of the children to him. The paramount consideration in this proceeding is the welfare and best interest of the children. This is not an ordinary action and the issue as to the proper custody should not be here decided upon the error of the court in ruling upon the demurrer. In proceedings of this nature, technical rules of practice are not to be given controlling effect. The issue as to the proper custodian of the children should be decided upon its merits. Williams v. Perry (Tex.Com.App.) 58 S.W.(2d) 31.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cook v. Gregg
226 S.W.2d 146 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1949)
Stevens v. Denton
195 S.W.2d 796 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1946)
Thompson v. Haney
191 S.W.2d 491 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1945)
Lanford v. Carruth
186 S.W.2d 368 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1945)
Hamer v. Hamer
184 S.W.2d 492 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Brillhart v. Brillhart
176 S.W.2d 229 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1943)
Conley v. St. Jacques
110 S.W.2d 1238 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Southern Old Line Life Ins. Co. v. Mims
101 S.W.2d 396 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Williams v. Guynes
97 S.W.2d 988 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
88 S.W.2d 1086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-wilson-texapp-1935.