Moneyhon and Parrish-Moneyhon v. Moneyhon Discussion
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Liberty University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
235
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
1
Uploaded by DoctorJellyfishPerson6478
Many people reaching an older age start thinking about when the time to pass away will come.
Although it may sound frightening, it is the natural course of life that since we are born, by
conclusion, we must die as well. Some people decide to start their estate planning during
retirement age, while others live one day at a time, worry-free about what tomorrow will bring.
In the case of Moneyhon v. Moneyhon
, 278 S.W.3d 874 (2009), 1), the appellate court decided
that the previous judgment was reversed. The court found that the trial court erred in applying the
proper pleading. The appellate court found that the case did not constitute an existence or
fiduciary duty from the appellant parties. The trial court applied that the theory of fiduciary duty
did not apply because neither party pleaded nor tried the consent. 2) The position of the parties in
the case and their arguments could have been better. For instance, the appellate court applied the
law correctly, and under the circumstances, the law is the governing authority in civil disputes. In
this sense, the appellant party received a fair judgment when the decision was reversed.
However, the court decision is unjust to the appellee at the same time.
3) While it was not explicitly said, mother and son, when selling the Bash Place and buying a
new home in Lake Jackson and moving together, created a common agreement that they both
would co-own the house as the proceeds (money) come from the sale of previous property.
Although the trial court applied justice that the Lake Jackson house was acquired using Patricia’s
money and so the house belongs to her, the title and legal documents belong to the son. Under
just circumstances, the son would acknowledge the mother’s right to property of the house,
which was acquired using her money. A more just decision will be that the Lake Jackson house
should be sold and divide the sale proceeds in half.
4) The bible teaches us:
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love
the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and
money.” Matthew
6:24 (NIV). In a Christian worldview, the son’s pursuit of property depicts an
unjust outcome that shows that money and ambition for material acquisition are more important
than the love of family. Similarly, God teaches, “Honor your father and your mother, so that you
may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.” Exodus
20:12 (NIV).
Applying the Holy Scripture and considering our moral character to the context of the case of
study, we can conclude that under certain circumstances, the law can be fair; however, fair does
not always mean it is just to all. Justice is sometimes based on tangible information that leaves
the moral character aside from being considered.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help