Court Opinion

ID: 9831096
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:48:35.121362+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:30.751304
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Behearing and for Additional Findings of Fact.
[4] After the rendition of the judgment for divorce, J. O. Shook’s status was that of an unmarried man, the relation with his wife having been severed, and she then constituted no part of his family. The divorce, however, did not sever the relations between him and his children. It is true their care and custody was awarded to the wife, Carrie Shook;' but this decree did not discharge him from his legal and moral obligation to care for and support them should the wife, fail to do so. These obligations resting upon him, his status as the head of a family continued after the divorce, though he had formed no new connections to constitute him the head of a family.
[5] The district court had the right in the divorce suit to settle the property rights of the parties, and it did so in this suit. With the exception of some household and kitchen furniture, the homestead constituted all of the community property. This being all of the community property, the court did not'have the authority to subject J. O. Shook’s one-half to the payment of Mrs. Shook’s claim, it being the homestead, as provided by the judgment, as the judgment was inoperative as to that property.
Motion overruled.