Case Citator › Murff v. Murff

Murff v. Murff

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of Texas
Citation
615 S.W.2d 696
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
56 of 56
Citing cases (total)
56
Treatment dates
1993
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Murff v. Murff remains good law on broad discretion in dividing marital property, subject to the narrow limitation listed below. All 56 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

A three-justice plurality of the Supreme Court of Texas said a court may not use the same conduct both to award tort damages and to justify a disproportionate property division. The other citing opinions did not adversely treat Murff; most applied its discretion standard or overruled an appellate issue.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

56 later cases cite Murff v. Murff; 56 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Murff v. Murff?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • A three-justice plurality said Murff's fault factor cannot support a disproportionate property division when the same conduct also supports an award of tort damages.

    Twyman v. Twyman · Supreme Court of Texas · filed

    When dividing the marital estate, the court may take into account several factors, including the fault of the parties if pleaded. See Murff v. Murff, 615 S.W.2d 696, 699 (Tex.1981). ... However, a spouse should not be allowed to recover tort damages and a disproportionate division of the community estate based on the same conduct.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Murff v. Murff and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace