TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Carter v. Carter

George CARTER v. Mary Edith CARTER

Carter v. Carter, 362 S.W.2d 646 (Tex. 1962)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Texas Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 17, 1962
Docket
No. A-9196
Citations
362 S.W.2d 6466 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 431962 Tex. LEXIS 774

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that portion of the trial court’s judgment which granted petitioner a divorce, but reversed such judgment in so far as it awarded custody of the child to petitioner and remanded that phase of the case for a new trial. 359 S.W.2d 184 . Since this is a divorce action, the Supreme Court may exercise writ of error jurisdiction only if the case falls within the purview of either Subdivision 1 or Subdivision 2 of Article 1728. 1 See Article 1821; Bishop v. Bishop, Tex.Civ.App., 359 S.W.2d 869 ; Williams v. Williams, 160 Tex. 99 , 325 S.W.2d 682 ; Longoria v. Longoria, 160 Tex. 134 , 327 S.W.2d 453 . Petitioner does not contend that we have jurisdiction under Subdivision 1. He asserts jurisdiction under Subdivision 2, but the holdings of the Court of Civil Appeals in this case are not so in conflict with the decisions cited in the application for writ of error as to authorize us to exercise jurisdiction under that Subdivision. The application for writ of error is accordingly dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

. “1. Those in which the judges of the Courts of Civil Appeals may disagree upon any question of law material to the decision.

“2. Those in which one of the Courts of Civil Appeals holds differently from a prior decision of another Court of Civil Appeals, or of the Supreme Court upon any question of law material to a decision of the ease.”

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1965: 11970: 11982: 11997: 11999: 219652026peak 1999 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Quarles v. Quarles388 S.W.2d 926 (Tex. 1965)
  2. Cook v. Wofford458 S.W.2d 653 (Tex. 1970)
  3. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. Oct. 7, 1999)
  4. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. July 18, 1997)
  5. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. Dec. 22, 1982)
  6. Untitled Texas Attorney General OpinionNo. JC-122 (Tex. Att'y Gen. July 2, 1999)

Most recent

  1. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. Oct. 7, 1999)
  2. Untitled Texas Attorney General OpinionNo. JC-122 (Tex. Att'y Gen. July 2, 1999)
  3. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. July 18, 1997)
  4. Opinion No.(Tex. Att'y Gen. Dec. 22, 1982)
  5. Cook v. Wofford458 S.W.2d 653 (Tex. 1970)
  6. Quarles v. Quarles388 S.W.2d 926 (Tex. 1965)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Williams v. Williams, 325 S.W.2d 682 (Tex. 1959) 31
Longoria v. Longoria, 327 S.W.2d 453 (Tex. 1959) 10
Bishop v. Bishop, 359 S.W.2d 869 (Tex. 1962) 152
Carter v. Carter, 359 S.W.2d 184 (Tex. App. 1962) 10

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list