## Facts

- Before marriage, the husband traveled to Texas to find a home and, on July 7, 1973, signed a contract to purchase a residence in his name only.
- The parties married on August 14, 1973.
- On August 24, 1973, the seller executed a deed naming both spouses as grantees.
- The entire purchase price was paid from the husband’s separate funds.
- The parties later separated, and a divorce action was filed on May 16, 1978.
- The parties stipulated that (1) the purchase contract was executed before marriage and (2) the property was paid for entirely from the husband’s separate funds.
- The case was tried to the court without a jury; no findings of fact or conclusions of law were requested or filed.
- The decree granted divorce and characterized the residence as the husband’s separate property; the wife appealed only that characterization.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence required a finding that the wife owned an undivided one-half separate interest in the residence because she was named as a grantee in the deed.
2. Whether the deed to both spouses, combined with payment from the husband’s separate funds, created a presumption of gift to the wife that was not rebutted (or otherwise required community characterization).
3. How the absence of findings of fact and conclusions of law affected appellate review of the property characterization.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the decree characterizing the residence as the husband’s separate property.
- The stipulations supported a determination that title incepted before marriage and that the consideration came solely from the husband’s separate estate, rebutting the community presumption.
- In the absence of findings, the court presumed the trial court made all fact findings necessary to support the judgment, including any finding negating a gift to the wife.

## Legal Principles

- Property acquired during marriage is presumed community, but the presumption may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence establishing separate-property characterization.
- Under the inception-of-title doctrine, property character is determined when the right to acquire the property arises; a pre-marriage purchase contract supports separate-property characterization.
- Stipulations establishing inception of title before marriage and payment from separate funds can rebut the community presumption.
- When a bench trial is conducted without findings of fact or conclusions of law, the reviewing court presumes implied findings supporting the judgment and will affirm if supported by evidence of probative force.
- A deed naming both spouses may raise a gift contention, but the trial court may reject a gift theory on the record, and implied findings control on appeal absent contrary conclusive proof.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the residence as the husband’s separate property because the purchase right arose before marriage and the home was paid for with his separate funds; without findings, the appellate court presumed all necessary fact determinations supporting the rejection of the wife’s claimed one-half interest.


Johnson v. Johnson, 584 S.W.2d 307 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1979)