Jacobs v. Jacobs
Texas Supreme Court
687 S.W.2d 731 (1985)
- Written by Whitney Kamerzel , JD
Facts
Roy Jacobs (defendant) and Ellen Jacobs (plaintiff) were married and subsequently divorced. The trial court held that the Jacobses’ community-property estate was valued at approximately $1,300,000 and was to be equitably divided. However, a substantial amount of this value consisted of community-property reimbursement claims for time, effort, and other community resources used by Roy to increase the value of his separate-property company. The value of the reimbursement claims was not identified in the divorce decree. Roy appealed, arguing the reimbursement claims resulted in a mischaracterization of his separate property as community property. The court of appeals agreed with Roy because there was no evidence to support the reimbursement claims. Instead of remanding the entire case to the trial court for a new community-property division, the court of appeals tried to value the reimbursement claims and subtract them from the value of the community property. Moreover, the court of appeals remanded the case on the limited issue of eliminating the reimbursement claims consistent with the court of appeals’ valuation of those claims. Roy appealed, arguing the court of appeals should have reversed and remanded the entire case to the trial court for a new community-property distribution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ray, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.