Texas Divorce Attorney BlogSince no-fault divorce statutes were first implemented in the United States at the end of the 1960s Zeitgeist (with California being the first state to allow a “no-fault” divorce in 1969), many have cried that there is an epidemic of skyrocketing divorce rates that is only getting higher with the passage of time. Continue Reading ›
First Same-Sex Marriage License in Texas Leaves More Questions than Answers
A federal district judge in Texas rules that Texas’s Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage violated the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. That ruling was stayed pending appeal—a common procedure in this type of case (when a law has been ruled unconstitutional, it is common to keep the law in place until the appeals process is exhausted). This is an important note as the United States Supreme Court rejected a Petition from the state of Alabama to stay same-sex marriage until the issue is resolved by the Supreme Court of the United States. Many believe this move by the majority of the United States Supreme Court Justices is an indication of how they might ultimately rule on whether individual states can decide whether or not same-sex couples can get married within their state.
The state of Texas still has a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage; however, in light of the Federal District Court Judge’s ruling that Texas’s Constitutional ban violated the United States Constitution, a Travis County judge ordered the Clerk of Travis County to issue a marriage license to Sarah Goodfriend and Suzanne Bryant. The Judge issues a “one-time” exception because Ms. Goodfriend has deteriorating health with ovarian cancer. On Friday, Texas’s Attorney General, Ken Paxton filed a petition with the Texas Supreme Court in order to declare the marriage license issued by the Travis County Clerk to Ms. Goodfriend and Ms. Bryant to be declared void. Continue Reading ›
Devon Still and Outstanding Child Support? What if in Texas?
Many have heard the story of Devon Still and his daughter Leah—a four year old in a battle with cancer. Recently, it was reported that Devon Still ex, and mother of Leah, is accusing Mr. Still of failing to pay child support for many months. The question that many are asking is whether Mr. Still’s financial support for his daughter outside of “child support” would offset his child support obligation. If this occurred in Texas, what would a Court say?
In Texas, the answer is most likely no, and Mr. Still would be facing jail time for contempt of Court if he failed to pay court-ordered child support. Hypothetically, Assume that Mr. Still is under an order to pay child support in Texas. Would he have any defense for his failure to pay (other financial support, medical support, etc.)? The Texas Family Code has specific defenses for the failure to pay child support. These include voluntary relinquishment by the obligee (party owed support) to the obligor (party responsible for paying support). Basically, if the obligee gives the obligor more time than ordered by the Court, the obligor can have a defense to failure to pay child support if he also provided actual support of the child. In Mr. Still’s case, if he had possession of his daughter full-time due to the fact that her mother voluntarily relinquished their daughter to Mr. Still, then he would have an affirmative defense to the Court’s enforcement of his child support obligation. Continue Reading ›
How a Texas Court Might Have Handled the Hamm Divorce
This past November, an Oklahoma County Judge ordered billionaire oilman Harold Hamm to pay approximately $1 billion to Sue Ann Hamm, his wife of 26 years. Harold Hamm, who is the founder and CEO of Continental Resources, was specifically ordered to pay Sue Ann Hamm a total of $995.5 million, comprised of a lump sum payment of $320 million to be paid by the end of 2014, and the remainder to be paid via installments of at least $7 million per month.
If the Hamm divorce occurred in Texas, then the result might have been different. For one, Texas is a community property state; whereas, Oklahoma is an equitable distribution state. In Texas, all property existing at the time of divorce is presumed to be community property. To rebut the “community-property presumption,” a spouse must present clear and convincing evidence of the property’s separate character. Income from community property during marriage is generally considered community property, and under Texas law, once the character of property is established, that character will not change because of appreciation in the property’s value or because of mutations in the property’s form (for example, being exchanged or sold for other property). Texas Family Code, Chapter 3.
In Oklahoma, however, the money a spouse earns while married is considered “marital property” (property that can be divided upon divorce) if it is made through skill. On the other hand, if the money is attributable to “changing economic conditions, or circumstances beyond the parties’ control,” then that money is not considered marital property. If all of Mr. Hamm’s fortune was acquired by means other than by gift, devise or descent during the marriage, then a Texas trial court could have found that the assets comprising Mr. Hamm’s approximate $14 billion net worth were community property and made a ruling in conformity with such a finding (which likely would have resulted in a substantially greater sum than $1 billion being awarded to Sue Ann Hamm).
Same Sex Divorce In Texas
Article 1 Section 32 of the Texas Constitution states that “Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman… this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” Also, under the Texas Family Code, the Legislature of Texas enacted section 6.204 which states that same-sex marriage and civil unions are void as they are against the public policy of Texas. This section further states that same-sex marriage and civil unions from other jurisdictions are void as well. The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional—effectively making same-sex marriage recognized on the federal level. So if a same-sex married couple gets married in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage, then moves to Texas, how does this couple get divorced? The couple would be married in the eyes of the federal government (for example in filing an income tax return with the IRS), but would not be married in the eyes of the state of Texas. Divorce is an issue that is handled on the state level. State Courts, not Federal Courts, grant divorces.
So if a member of a same-sex couple who was married in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage wishes to get divorced while living in Texas, what can he or she do? That is the question that is currently in front of the Supreme Court of Texas. The Court faces a tricky legal question because granting a divorce in Texas requires the existence of a valid marriage. If the Court chooses to grant the divorce, then the Court would be acknowledging a valid marriage which violates the Texas Constitution. On the other hand, if the Court were to deny the divorce, then the same-sex couple would, against their wishes, still be married in the eyes of the federal government and states that recognize same sex marriage.
The same-sex married couples’ options would be file a suit in Texas to declare the marriage void—which tells other states and the federal government that the parties were never validly married (even though they were validly married in the state where their same-sex marriage was granted)—or, establish residency and obtain a divorce in another state. Continue Reading ›
Recognizing Same-Sex Marriage in the Divorce Context
The State of Texas will not grant a marriage license to same-sex applicants, but can the State of Texas grant a divorce to spouses of the same sex who were married in a state where same-sex marriage is legal? On November 5, 2013, the Supreme Court of Texas heard this issue, and a decision is currently pending. The Supreme Court matter involves couples from Austin and Dallas who married in Massachusetts and eventually filed for divorce in Texas. Both couples obtained divorces from the State of Texas at the District Court level; however, the Office of the Attorney General intervened in the case of the Dallas couple and won a decision from the Court of Appeals for the 5th District of Texas, which overturned the order of the 302nd Judicial District Court of Texas granting the divorce. The Office of the Attorney General has argued that there can be no granting of a same-sex divorce in the State of Texas since the State of Texas does not recognize same-sex marriage. The Texas Family Code provides that a marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union is contrary to the state’s public policy and is void. The Texas Family Code further states that the State of Texas may not give effect to a public act, record, or judicial proceeding that creates, recognizes or validates a marriage between persons of the same sex in any other jurisdiction—meaning that the State of Texas can recognize neither a same-sex marriage from another state nor a same-sex divorce from another state.
The same-sex marriage and divorce dilemma is appearing and being heard in other states that do not currently recognize same-sex marriage, including Mississippi and Kentucky. Since same-sex marriage is currently legal in only 16 states, this nationwide problem is not likely to disappear anytime soon. Same-sex couples who are married in a state where same-sex marriage is legal and then move to one of the 34 states that do not recognize same-sex marriage are the victims of this problem. For these same-sex couples to obtain a divorce, they oftentimes need to move back to the state where they were married or to a state that recognizes same-sex marriage in order to establish the residency and domiciliary status that is necessary to obtain a divorce from those jurisdictions. The process of going through a divorce can be painful, and that pain only exacerbates if a spouse is required to relocate to a different state just to be able to exit an irreconcilable relationship.
The problem expands even further when considering that an inability to divorce in some cases means that an estranged spouse can be entitled to receive spousal benefits after the couple is no longer living together or holding themselves out as married. To make matters worse, even if a divorce is obtained in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, the marital property can remain in abeyance afterwards if the state where the property is located does not recognize same-sex marriage. These issues are complicated, and they require examination from not only our judicial branch of government but also our state legislatures.