Erik Trove v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 299th District Court of Travis County

State: Texas

Docket No: 03-04-00578-CR

Case Date: 11/14/2007

Plaintiff: PD RAUL ONTIVEROS

Defendant: THE STATE OF TEXAS (Other)

Preview:Frank C. Garcia, Jr. v. Emily Ann Mills (f/k/a Emily Ann Garcia)--Appeal from 150th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
MAJORITY | MAJORITY CONCURRING OPINION No. 04-02-00790-CV Frank C. GARCIA, Jr. Appellant v. Emily Ann MILLS, f/k/a Emily Ann Garcia, Appellee From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 1980-CI-03877 Honorable Patrick J. Boone, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice Concurring opinion by: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice Sarah B. Duncan, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: August 13, 2003 I concur in the judgment because of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Reiss v. Reiss. I write separately, however, because I agree with the dissent in Reiss. I believe the dissent is correct when it states that, when construing a decree, we must look at the decree as a whole. See Reiss v. Reiss, No. 01-0251, 2002 WL 32122828, *4 (Tex. June 26, 2003) (Jefferson, J., dissenting). Here, the Agreement Incident to Divorce states clearly that "All provisions of this section are intended to effect only the partition of the community property." (Emphasis added.) This provision must be read together with the award to Mills of "twenty-five (25%) percent of the Husband's civil service retirement benefits, if[,] as, and when he receives the same." The portion of the retirement benefits accruing after the divorce is Garcia's separate property and, in my opinion, it is unreasonable to conclude that the decree awards Mills part of his separate property. However, because we are bound by Supreme Court decisions, I concur. Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/16348.html[8/20/2013 7:39:06 PM]

Download 16348.pdf