iStock-172302804-195x300A trial court may order Texas spousal maintenance, sometimes referred to as “spousal support” or “alimony,” if certain criteria are met pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 8.051..  If the marriage lasted at least 10 years, a court may order spousal maintenance to a spouse who does not have sufficient property or earning ability to provide for their own minimum reasonable needs.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 8.051(2)(B). A court may also award spousal maintenance to a spouse who does not have sufficient property and is not able to earn sufficient income to provide for their minimum reasonable needs due to their own incapacitating disability or the disability of the parties’ child.

Husband Order to Pay Spousal Maintenance

A husband recently challenged an order requiring him to pay spousal maintenance, arguing the wife had been awarded sufficient property to meet her reasonable minimum needs. The wife petitioned for divorce after nearly thirteen years of marriage.  The trial court ordered the husband to pay $2,500 in monthly spousal support for two years and he appealed.

The marriage had lasted for more than 10 years, so the wife was eligible to pursue spousal maintenance if she did not have sufficient property or the ability to earn sufficient income to provide for her minimum reasonable needs.  The trial court had awarded her assets worth $830,871.60 and she estimated her expenses to be $6,791 per month.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-839381426-300x200When a parent seeks modification of Texas custody, they generally must show there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances since the prior order was rendered and that the change is in the best interest of the children.  A parent petitioning to change the designation of the parent with the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence within one year of the prior order must also attach an affidavit making one of three allegations.  The affidavit may allege the child’s current environment may endanger their physical health or significantly impair their emotional development.  If the person with the exclusive right to designate the primary resident is seeking or consenting to the modification, the affidavit may allege the modification is in the best interest of the child. Finally, the affidavit may allege that the person with the exclusive right has voluntarily surrendered the child’s primary care and possession for six months or more and that the change is in the child’s best interest.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 156.102(a).

In a recent case, a father appealed a summary judgment denying his petition for modification.  The parents were named joint managing conservators of the children in the 2014 divorce decree, but neither was given the exclusive right to determine their residence.  In 2018, the trial court gave the mother that right, with a geographic restriction.

Father Files Modification Suit

The father petitioned to modify the order, alleging a material and substantial change in circumstances and that the children’s current environment could endanger their health or significantly impair their emotional development. He further alleged the modification would be in the best interest of the children.  He also alleged the mother neglected the children.

Continue Reading ›

judge-and-gavel-in-courtroom-171096040-583b48533df78c6f6af9f0e3-300x225While videoconferencing technology allowed certain court proceedings to occur and cases to move forward during the pandemic when in-person proceedings were not available, the technology is not without its problems in a court setting.  Some individuals, especially those living in rural areas, may not have access to a strong internet connection. Others may not have appropriate devices or know how to use the technology.  Another serious issue can be control of the courtroom, including technical issues, distractions, and disruptions by parties or non-parties. In a recent case, a wife challenged a divorce decree because judgment was rendered after the trial was stopped during the presentation of her case.

Divorce Trial Held Over Zoom – and Stopped Abruptly

The divorce case was held over Zoom without a jury.  The wife was the first witness, and the husband kept interrupting, often accusing the wife of lying.  The trial judge was unable to stop him and ultimately stopped the trial before the wife had finished presenting her case.  The trial judge stated she would grant the divorce and divide the property.

The final divorce decree was signed on January 29, 2021.  The decree granted the divorce and the wife’s name change. It also divided the assets and liabilities.  The wife moved for a new trial, arguing the trial had been stopped early.  The husband died less than two months after the decree was signed.  The wife subsequently appealed.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1033856542-300x200A person may rescind a Texas acknowledgement of paternity no later than 60 days after its effective date, or earlier if a court proceeding on an issue relating to the child is initiated.  Once this time passes, the party may challenge the acknowledgement only on the basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.307. Under current law, a proceeding challenging the acknowledgment may be commenced any time before an order affecting the child is issued. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.308. That statute was amended in 2011, however.  Suits challenging acknowledgements signed before September 1, 2011 must be filed within four years of the date the acknowledgement was filed with the state.

In a recent case, a man, identified in the appeals court’s opinion by the pseudonym “William,” attempted to challenge an Acknowledgement of Paternity he had signed and filed in 2005. William petitioned the trial court to set aside the acknowledgment in September 2019 “on the basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact.”  He did not, however, make specific allegations.  The mother argued the petition was time-barred.

Only William testified at the trial.  The mother did not appear or participate.  The trial court found the petition was untimely and denied it.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1163040189-300x200When parents cannot cooperate to make decisions regarding the children in a Texas custody case, the court may give one parent certain decision-making rights, even if the parents are joint managing conservators.  In a recent case, a father challenged a court order requiring him to cooperate in the children’s activities and to pay for half of the children’s tutoring expenses.

The parents were named joint managing conservators of the children in the divorce decree with a modified standard possession order. The mother was granted the exclusive right to designate their primary residence and the father ordered to pay child support.  Each parent was responsible for half of any extracurricular activity the parents agreed upon.

Mother Files Modification Suit

The mother petitioned for modification in 2018, seeking the right to make certain decisions after consulting with the father, continuation of certain extracurricular activities, and therapy for the children.  In a counterpetition, the father asked the court to give him the right to designate the primary residence and receive child support.  He also asked that the mother be required to schedule extracurricular activities only while she had the children.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1271310078-300x200Under Texas family law, certain close relatives of a child may seek managing conservatorship if they can sufficiently show the child’s current circumstances would significantly impair the child physically or emotionally.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 102.004(a)(1).  A sister recently sought custody of her siblings, asserting standing under § 102.004(a)(1).

Children’s Sister Seeks Custody After Mother’s Death

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the adult sister filed suit seeking to be named the sole managing conservator of her minor siblings a few weeks after her mother’s death.  She claimed she had standing to bring the suit because she was their sister and had “a close and substantial relationship with the children.”

The father asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of standing.  The sister amended her suit to claim standing pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code § 102.004(a)(1).  The sister attached to her brief a copy of her mother’s will, which named the sister and her husband as the children’s guardians.  The father attached a letter to his own brief which showed the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (“Department”) had ruled out allegations of abuse against him.

Continue Reading ›

2018_10_agreement-300x165People commonly obtain life-insurance policies and name their spouse as the beneficiary. They do not always remember to update the beneficiary designation when they get divorced.  Under Texas law, designation of a spouse as beneficiary before a divorce will only remain effective after the divorce in certain circumstances.  Generally, either the court or the insured must designate the former spouse as beneficiary, or the former spouse must be designated to receive the proceeds in trust for a child or dependent’s benefit.  In a recent case, an ex-wife challenged a court awarding a life-insurance policy on the ex-husband to the ex-husband many years after the original divorce.

Insurance Policy Not Divided in Divorce

During the marriage, the parties obtained a life insurance policy on the husband with the wife named as beneficiary.  The policy was not addressed in the divorce decree in 2009.  The husband subsequently filed a bill of review, and the parties agreed to be co-owners of the policy.  They agreed the wife would receive half of the proceeds and the rest would go into a trust for their children. The court ordered the parties to split the policy into two, but the insurance company was unable to do so.

The husband then filed for declaratory judgment, seeking to be named the sole owner of the policy.  He also asked for a temporary restraining order against both the wife and the insurer. Alternatively, he sought to divide undivided property.  The wife’s counter-petition also sought a declaratory judgment that the policy was her separate property and to divide undivided assets.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-952098878-300x200When child support goes unpaid, Texas child-support cases can sometimes go on for years after the obligation would otherwise have terminated. A Texas appeals court recently considered what happens when one parent dies before the past-due child support has been paid.

The parents had a daughter together during their marriage and divorced in 1976.  The father failed to pay child support as ordered at times.  The trial court found him in contempt in 1987 and ordered him to pay $200 per month in support with additional amounts for a specified time going toward the arrearages.

Adult Daughter Files Child-Support Suit After Mother’s Death

In 2010, the adult daughter filed a petition regarding the unpaid support after her mother’s death. She asked the court to render judgment for the past due child support and to make her the obligee for the arrearages.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1125625723-300x200When parties to a Texas divorce reach an agreement, the agreement may place conditions on certain obligations.  A “condition precedent” is something that must occur before a party has a right to performance of an obligation by the other party. In a recent case, a mother challenged a trial court’s finding she had not met the condition precedent to receive certain payments from the father.

In the final divorce decree, the trial court approved and incorporated the parties’ Agreement Incident to Divorce (“AID”). The parties agreed the father would pay $11,500 in monthly Contract Support Payments to the mother to provide her and the two children an “alternative lifestyle.”  They would travel and live abroad so the children could learn other languages and cultures. The mother agreed to maintain this lifestyle and spend the Contract Support Payments to support it as a condition precedent to receiving the payments. The AID also included a provision that the father could send a notice if the mother failed to comply with a material term or condition. If she failed to cure the breach within 30 days, the Contract Support Payments would be abated until she complied.

Father Grows Concerned About Children’s Upbringing

The mother and children traveled within the U.S. and several countries abroad until July 2018. The father grew concerned about the children’s lack of structured education and their health and hygiene by the summer of 2018.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-182779759-300x200

“A scroll of a Divorce Decree, tied with a black ribbon on a mahogany desk, with a dead white rose buttonhole from the Wedding Day, with a black pen. Copy space..”

A Texas Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) must generally include language that it is not subject to revocation, be signed by each party, and be signed by the party’s attorney who is present at the time of execution. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.602(b). If the MSA meets these requirements, it is binding and the court must render a divorce decree adopting it. The judgment must be compliant with the agreement and must not substantively alter it. The parties may revise or repudiate the agreement before the divorce is rendered, unless the agreement is otherwise binding under another law. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.006.

In a recent case, a former wife appealed a divorce decree, arguing the court erred in rendering judgment on a settlement after she revoked her consent.  The parties had reached an agreement at mediation and signed an MSA, but only the husband’s attorney’s signature was on the document.

Wife Revokes Consent to MSA

The wife filed a revocation of consent and an objection to the entry of a final divorce decree. She argued the agreement was not valid without her counsel’s signature and was therefore revocable.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information