Nail v. Nail
486 S.W.2d 761, 52 A.L.R. 3d 1338, 16 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 67 (1972)
Rule of Law:
The goodwill of a professional practice that is dependent on the personal skill, experience, and reputation of an individual is not property subject to division as part of the community estate in a divorce proceeding because it is not an earned or vested property right.
Facts:
- Dr. James B. Nail, Jr. and Alice J. Nail were married in 1945.
- During the marriage, Dr. Nail completed his medical education and residency to become a specialist in ophthalmology.
- Dr. Nail established a medical practice in Wichita Falls, Texas, in 1956.
- The success and value of the practice were based on Dr. Nail's personal skill, experience, and reputation.
- Alice J. Nail was not trained for any employment and supported Dr. Nail during his education and the establishment of his practice.
- The couple accumulated community property, including a house, cars, a boat, and the medical practice itself.
Procedural Posture:
- Alice J. Nail sued Dr. James B. Nail, Jr. for divorce in a Texas trial court.
- The trial court granted the divorce and, in its division of property, found that the goodwill of Dr. Nail's medical practice was community property.
- The trial court awarded Alice J. Nail $40,000 as her community interest in the practice's goodwill, payable in monthly installments by Dr. Nail.
- Dr. Nail, the appellant, appealed the trial court's decision to the Court of Civil Appeals.
- A divided Court of Civil Appeals, an intermediate appellate court, affirmed the trial court's judgment.
- Dr. Nail, the petitioner, then appealed to the Supreme Court of Texas, the state's highest court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the goodwill of a professional practice that is dependent on the personal skill and reputation of a specific individual constitute property subject to division as part of the community estate in a divorce proceeding?
Opinions:
Majority - Steakley
No. The goodwill of a professional practice that is dependent upon the personal characteristics of the owner does not constitute property subject to division in a divorce. The court reasoned that such goodwill is not an earned or vested property right, but rather a mere expectancy wholly dependent on the continuation of existing circumstances. Unlike a vested asset such as retirement benefits, professional goodwill has no existence separate from the individual's person and ability to practice their profession. It would be extinguished upon the professional's death, retirement, or disablement, and therefore cannot be characterized as a divisible asset in the community estate.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant precedent in Texas family law by distinguishing personal professional goodwill from divisible marital property. It clarifies that future earning capacity and reputation, while valuable, are not tangible assets that can be partitioned in a divorce. This holding prevents courts from dividing speculative future income, thereby protecting professionals from being forced to pay for an intangible asset that is entirely dependent on their future labor and continued success. The case sets a clear line between earned, vested property rights and mere expectancies tied to an individual's personal attributes.
