Davis v. Davis

521 S.W.2d 603 (1975)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Davis v. Davis

Texas Supreme Court
521 S.W.2d 603 (1975)

Facts

Charles Davis married Mary Nell Davis (defendant) in Texas in 1966. Charles, who frequently traveled for work, traveled to Singapore, where he met Nancy Davis (plaintiff), a young Chinese woman. Charles told Nancy that he was divorced, and Charles and Nancy later participated in a Buddhist wedding ceremony in October 1968, in the presence of family and friends. Charles and Nancy entered into a marriage contract that certified that the marriage had been solemnized. Charles and Nancy lived together as a married couple in Singapore until December 1970, when Charles died in a shipwreck. In January 1971, Mary and Nancy each gave birth to a child. Nancy brought a matter in the probate court of Chambers County, Texas, seeking a share of Charles’s estate. For Nancy to inherit, she had to establish that she was either Charles’s lawful widow or his putative spouse. Nancy testified in a pretrial deposition that before Charles’s death, she learned that Mary had been trying to divorce Charles. At trial, Mary argued that Nancy’s deposition testimony established that Nancy was not Charles’s putative spouse when he died because Nancy was on notice that Charles was still married to Mary. The probate court held, among other things, that Nancy was Charles’s lawful widow. Mary appealed to the district court, which determined, among other things, that Mary was Charles’s lawful widow and Nancy was Charles’s putative spouse. The court of civil appeals agreed with the district court that Mary was Charles’s lawful widow but held, among other things, that Nancy was not Charles’s putative spouse when Charles died. Nancy appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, arguing that she was Charles’s lawful widow or, in the alternative, that she was Charles’s putative spouse.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Reavley, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 783,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 783,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 783,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership