In Vallone v. Miller, 663 S.W.2d 97 (Tex. App.--Houston 14th Dist. 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.), which was an appeal from a take-nothing judgment on appellant's suit seeking specific performance of a contract to convey real property, the court was presented with "a completed written agreement to convey property that had been executed by appellant as purchaser and appellee husband as seller." Id. at 97-98. The court noted that in the blank for the name of the "sellers" were the names of both the husband and his wife, but only the husband signed the agreement. Id. at 98. The husband and wife "contended that the property was joint management community property which could not be conveyed or encumbered by one spouse alone; and asserted the contract was incomplete on its face and it had no force or effect because the wife's signature did not appear on the document." Id. After a jury found "that the property was joint management community property, the trial judge entered a take nothing judgment in favor of husband and wife." Id. On appeal, the court noted that "it is clear that a husband has the right to convey his one-half interest in non-homestead joint management community property without the signature of his wife on the conveyance." Id. Then, the court explained: "The earnest money contract is incomplete on its face and is not capable of being enforced by specific performance. While both husband and wife are named as sellers only the husband's signature appears on the contract. The description of the property to be sold is not in terms of the husband's "undivided one-half interest" or other words to indicate that only the husband's interest was involved. From the terms of the document it is evident the parties intended that the agreement would be effective only upon execution by both husband and wife as sellers. Once there was the proper execution, the contract was to involve the interests of both husband and wife." Id. In Vallone, the court was faced with the following question: "whether the signature of one spouse was binding upon both husband and wife." Id. at 99. The court noted that "one spouse cannot alone convey or encumber joint management community property unless the spouses have otherwise agreed." Id. The court concluded "without a 'power of attorney in writing or other agreement' to the contrary, the husband had no authority to contract to dispose of the entire joint management community property without his wife joining in the contract." Id.