Garcia v. Garcia ( 1944 )

NORVELL, Justice.

This is a divorce case brought here by-writ of error: Articles 2249 and 2249a, Vernon’s Ann. Civ. Stats., Rules 359-363, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

The complaint of the sufficiency of the petition for divorce is not well taken, but the judgment must be reversed as the evidence is' not “full and satisfactory” as required by Article 4632, Vernon’s Ann.Civ. Stats.

As cause for divorce, defendant in error, Telesforo Garcia, relied upon the grounds set forth in Article 4629, § 1, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats.

Telesforo Garcia was the only witness who testified at the trial and the record of his testimony occupies three and a half pages of a Q and A statement of facts.

It appears that Telesforo Garcia married plaintiff in error, Atanacia Chamberlain de Garcia, in 1921. They separated in April, 1943. The parties have a son twenty-two years of age, now serving in the American Navy. They had separated several times prior to the 1943 separation.

As to the nature of his wife’s conduct, Telesforo Garcia testified as follows:

“Q. What has been the nature of her conduct toward you for the last few years ? A. She didn’t live happily with me; she was always jealous and quarreling with me.

“Q. Did she have a jealous disposition? A. Very much so.

“Q. What kind of temper did she have? A. Very violent.

“Q. Did she quarrel at you? A. Yes, sir; all the time.

“Q. Did she abuse you? A. Yes, sir.

“Q. Did she make your home life unhappy? A. Yes, sir. * * *

“Q. What conclusion did you reach the last time you tried to live with her as to whether you would be able to make a success of your married life? A. No, sir; I couldn’t live with her any more.

“Q. What effect did it have on your life and your work, the violent abuse and quarrels indulged in the last time? A. I went to her mother’s home and she told me she didn’t love me and didn’t want to have anything more to do with me.

“Q. What effect did that statement have on you? A. It made me nervous and I came to the conclusion it would be impossible to live with her any longer. * * *

“Court: Just what was this quarreling about ? A. Sometimes I would come home early and other times I would come home late, and she was very jealous and always accused me of running around with other women, which was absolutely untrue, and she always argued with me about that.”

Under the authorities the decree cannot stand. McCullough v. McCullough, 120 Tex. 209, 36 S.W.2d 459; Hyatt v. Hyatt, Tex.Civ.App., 111 S.W.2d 341; 15 Tex.Jur. 547, § 84.

The judgment appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded.