Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte Brister

Texas Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1990No. C-9567Published

1DissentGonzalez, Justice

Without any complaint from Mrs. Brister that she was confused or that she lacked understanding of what her duties or obligations were in connection with the divorce decree’s provision allowing her ex-husband to visit with his three-year-old son the court holds that the divorce decree is ambiguous. In my opinion, the decree was sufficiently certain and without a record of the contempt hearing before us, we must presume that all procedural requirements were met. Because I disagree with both the majority and concurring opinions, I will address them separately.

DIVORCE DECREE

The court’s opinion…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Graham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1983
  2. Gengnagel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
  3. Ex Parte RhodesTexas Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Ex Parte SavelleTexas Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Ex Parte HarrisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API