noting that "[t]he presumption that property purchased during the marriage is community property is very cogent, and can only be repelled by clear and conclusive proof that it was with the individual money or property of one of the partners."
How later courts described this case
- noting that "[t]he presumption that property purchased during the marriage is community property is very cogent, and can only be repelled by clear and conclusive proof that it was with the individual money or property of one of the partners."
- “Dividends are, of course, community, but a stock dividend normally is that in name only. It is a mere rearrangement of the formal corporate bookkeeping structure with no increase in equity ownership.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
On Petition for Rehearing
PER CURIAM.
The Petition for Rehearing is denied. But in view of the statement in the supporting brief, 1 we think it advisable to eliminate any doubt by emphasizing that the proportionate community-separate estate ownership in each of the subitems comprising Items I, II and III has been fixed by our opinion (see especially notes 7 and 8 and related text). On remand the only matter left open is ascertaining and computing the amount of refund now due in view of this limited modification of the judgment appealed from.
. “Thus, the holding of this Court that the District Judge on remand should make an effort to allocate the bank account, brokerage account, and the stocks bought and paid for from such accounts pro rata to separate and community property, is in direct conflict with Texas law which says this shaE not be done.”