Court Opinion

ID: 9829378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:16:01.566438+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:00.569779
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We do not think we are in conflict with the Texarkana Court of Civil Appeals in Pierson et al. v. Beard et al., 181 S. W. 765. That was a direct appeal, and hence constituted a direct attack on the judgment, and the Court of Civil Appeals merely held that when it appeared from tile petition itself that one of the parties was a married woman and it was not shown that the debt was contracted for the benefit of her separate estate, nor did it otherwise appear that facts existed rendering her personally liable, no personal judgment should be rendered against her.
In the instant case, as to the original trial and judgment, it did not appear from the petition or otherwise that the defendant' Mrs. Nellie P. Akin was a married woman; the judgment was by default, and, moreover, the qttaek on the judgment is collateral. Therefore we adhere to our original holding. A default judgment against a married woman, where the petition does not disclose her coverture, is not thereby void, but merely voidable, even on direct action to set it aside. Focke et al. v. Sterling et al., 18 Tex. Civ. App. 8, 44 S. W. 611. In Baxter v. Dear, Adm’r, 24 Tex. 17, 76 Am. Dec. 89, it was held that a married woman could not set up, in a proceeding by scire facias to revive a judgment, a defense existing at the time of and concludéd by the original judgment.
Since writing our original opinion herein, there has appeared in the Southwestern Advance Sheets, 192 S. W. 1088, the case of Red River National Bank v. Ferguson et al., in which the Texarkana Court of Civil Appeals announces conclusions in consonance with the views, if not the holding, of the majority in the instant case, and goes somewhat into the history of the enactment of article 4624, Vernon’s Sayles’ Texas Civil Statutes. With this additional light thrown upon the question, the writer is prepared to withdraw the personal views expressed, to the effect that under the present law, that even though the original judgment herein were not by default, and even though the attack thereon-were direct, Mrs. Akin should be held liable.
Being of the opinion that our original judgment was correct, and that no conflict with the holding of any other Court of Civil Appeals is presented, we overruled the motion for rehearing, and also the motion to certify.