In the Matter of the Marriage of Crystal Lynn Allbritton and David Walker Allbritton v. the State of Texas
07-24-00119-CV
Tex. App.Jun 27, 2025Background
- Wife (Crystal Lynn Allbritton) filed for divorce against Husband (David Walker Allbritton) in January 2018.
- The divorce was tried over six court settings throughout 2023, and the trial court rendered a judgment in December 2023 with a formal decree issued January 25, 2024.
- The judgment dissolved the marriage, divided the community estate, and specifically discussed an equalization payment regarding funds disbursed during the suit and the characterization of the Aloha Condominium.
- Wife appealed, raising three issues regarding: (1) admission of certain evidentiary exhibits, (2) the classification of the Aloha Condominium as Husband’s separate property, and (3) the order for an equalization payment to Husband.
- During the appeal, Wife accepted funds distributed under the judgment, establishing a potential acceptance-of-benefits bar to her appellate claims.
- Findings of fact and conclusions of law were requested by Wife and filed by the trial court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of inheritance tracing exhibits | Exhibits 102–111 were wrongly admitted to support Husband's claim. | Evidence traced inheritance properly; admissible. | Overruled—no reversible error shown. |
| Characterization of Aloha Condominium | Condo should be community property; insufficient evidence to classify as separate property. | Property is Husband’s separate property. | Overruled—any mischaracterization not shown to affect overall division. |
| Equalization payment to Husband ($151,808) | Payment order was erroneous due to prior disbursements. | Wife already accepted and deposited funds; estopped. | Overruled as waived—acceptance-of-benefits doctrine applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kramer v. Kastleman, 508 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2017) (articulates the acceptance-of-benefits doctrine in appellate proceedings)
- Carle v. Carle, 234 S.W.2d 1002 (Tex. 1950) (prohibits appellants from treating a judgment as both right and wrong by accepting its benefits while appealing)
- Eggemeyer v. Eggemeyer, 554 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. 1979) (defines community and separate property in Texas marital law)
- Murff v. Murff, 615 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1981) (trial court has broad discretion in property division in a just and right manner)
- Boyd v. Boyd, 131 S.W.3d 605 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004) (mischaracterization of property is not reversible error absent demonstrated harm)