In a Texas divorce, the trial court must divide the estate in a just and right manner, but the division does not have to be equal.  Property possessed by either party during or on dissolution of the marriage is presumed to be community property.  To rebut the presumption, a party must generally trace the property back to separate property.  Without tracing, a party’s testimony they purchased the property with separate funds will generally not be sufficient to rebut the presumption. However, a presumption of separate property arises if a deed includes a separate property recital stating the property is transferred as separate property.  If a spouse is party to a transaction, they may not contradict the deed’s express recitals with parol or extrinsic evidence without evidence of fraud, accident or mistake.  If a spouse is not party to the transaction, however, they may use parol evidence to contradict the recitals.

A husband recently challenged the characterization of property in his divorce.

Both parties requested a disproportionate share of the community estate. The husband also requested reimbursement based on alleged waste and actual fraud by the wife.

Continue Reading ›

How-to-Improve-Your-Mental-Health-300x200In some Texas divorce cases, how a party requests something can determine if they are successful.  A wife recently challenged part of the property division and the court’s denial of her name change after a second trial.

The appeals court’s opinion states the wife informed the court the parties had agreed two pensions would be divided with “a 50 percent shared interest per each party as of the date of divorce.”  The husband’s attorney agreed that was their understanding of the agreement.

In a memorandum ruling, the trial court granted the divorce and accepted the parties’ agreement as to the fifty-fifty division of pensions.

Continue Reading ›

judge-and-gavel-in-courtroom-171096040-583b48533df78c6f6af9f0e3-300x225A Texas conservatorship order may be modified if doing so is in the child’s best interest and there’s been a material and substantial change in circumstances.  When a parent seeks modification, the other parent may file a counter-petition seeking their own modification.  In a recent case, a mother appealed a modification order in favor of the father after she had petitioned for modification.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, when the parties divorced, the trial court approved their agreement to be joint managing conservators with 50/50 custody.  The mother petitioned for modification, seeking primary custody and educational decision-making.   The father also sought appointment as primary conservator. He asked for modification allowing him to impose reasonable discipline and to limit the mother’s phone contact during his possession.

The mother pointed to the father’s allowing the son to stay alone, behavior at sporting events, storage of a gun, and a text message asking her to pick up the children because “he was done” with them.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1214358087-300x169Although testimony can be important evidence in a Texas divorce, documentary evidence is needed for some claims.  A wife recently challenged a number of issues in her divorce based on insufficiency of evidence.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties acquired several rental properties during their marriage.  The husband petitioned for divorce in July 2020.  The trial was originally scheduled for October 7, 2020, but the wife moved for a continuance and asked for mediation.

The trial date was reset for April 28, 2021, but the wife moved for another continuance the day before.  The trial was rescheduled for May 6, 2021, and she again requested a continuance. The trial court denied the motion.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1187184203-300x200TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 34.001(a) provides that a judgment becomes dormant if a writ of execution is not issued within 10 years of its rendition.  A judgment is dormant, execution may not be issued unless it is revived.  A dormant judgment may be revived within two years of becoming dormant.  TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 31.006.  A former wife recently argued that her ex-husband could not enforce a payment obligation contained in their divorce decree because the judgment had become dormant.

2008 Divorce – $30,000 Judgment Awarded to Husband

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties divorced in 2008.  The decree awarded the husband $30,000, with interest beginning 12 months after the judgment, secured by a lien on the home where the wife lived.  The unpaid principle and accrued interest were to be paid upon the earliest of: the sale of the home, the youngest child’s emancipation, the wife’s remarriage or cohabitation with a romantic partner, the wife’s death, or the home ceasing to be the primary residence of the children.

The husband filed an application for turnover and appointment of a receiver in 2021.  His counsel stated that the earliest of the listed events happened in May 2014, when the youngest child turned 18 and graduated high school.  The wife argued that the judgment had become dormant.  The trial court signed a turnover order and appointed a receiver to possess and liquidate the wife’s non-exempt property to satisfy the judgment.  She appealed.

Continue Reading ›

property-division-300x110Property in a Texas divorce does not have to be divided equally, but instead must be divided in a just and right manner.  There can be a number of ways to achieve a just and right division, especially when the property is a large piece of real estate.  In a recent case, a husband asked the court to award the wife a smaller portion of the parties’ ranch, which he claimed was more valuable than the rest of the ranch.

Wife Precluded from Presenting Testimony about Value of Ranch

The parties married in 1995.  When the wife petitioned for divorce, the parties owned a ranch together.  Before the trial, the husband moved to compel discovery and subsequently for discovery sanctions.  The trial court granted the motions and ordered that the wife would not be allowed to testify about the community property’s value.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, he husband testified that the tax appraisal for the ranch was $529,280, but that the ranch was only worth $400,000.  He asked the trial court to award him the entire ranch, or alternatively to award the wife the “richest 10 acres” and give him the other 40.  He testified the westernmost ten acres were the most beautiful and had the richest soil.  The remaining 40 acres included several improvements, including a mobile home, a barn, and a pond.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1214358087-300x169The division of property in a Texas divorce does not have to be equal, but should be “just and right.” Each party is responsible for providing evidence to show the value of the property so the court can make the division.  A Texas appeals court recently considered what happens when parties do not provide information regarding the marital estate.

Conflicting Testimony Regarding Parties’ Relationship at Trial

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband was sixty and the wife was twenty-seven when they met and married.  According to the husband, he met the wife on an online dating site and went to Monterrey, Mexico to meet her in person in October or November 2007.  After spending time with her that night and the next day, the husband came back to the U.S. The wife denied meeting on a dating site and instead said they met at a hotel bar.  They communicated via email and the husband visited the wife in Mexico a few more times.  They married in February 2008 in Monterrey.  The husband testified they did not have sexual relations or go on a honeymoon.  He came back to Texas a few days later and the wife stayed in Mexico.

The husband obtained an attorney to get visas for the wife and her son.  The visas were denied after an immigration interview in 2008.  The husband claimed he had no further relationship or communications with the wife until late 2017 or early 2018 when she contacted him wanting to come to the U.S. He hired an attorney again.  The wife obtained a visa in March 2018 and moved to Texarkana.  There were substantial differences in the parties’ testimony regarding their relationship while they lived together and the reasons the wife moved to Dallas in 2018.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1175949984-300x200When the trial court appoints joint managing conservators in a Texas custody case, it must identify who has the right to determine the child’s primary residence with or without a geographic restriction.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 153.134(b). The court must consider the child’s best interest.  The court may also modify the terms and conditions of the child’s conservatorship if doing so is in the child’s best interest.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 156.101.

A father recently challenged a trial court’s modification order adding a geographic restriction broader than that he requested.  In the original order establishing the parent-child relationship, both parents were named joint managing conservators, with the mother having the right to determine the child’s primary residence without any geographic restriction.  Both parents lived in Kerr County at the time.

Father Seeks to Modify Prior Order

The father subsequently sought modification of the order to give him extended visitation and add a geographic restriction of Kerr County.  The trial court ultimately granted the extended visitation and added a geographic restriction of Kerr, Atascosa, and Bexar counties and counties contiguous to Kerr.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1033856542-300x200When a mother is married at the time of her child’s birth, the husband is generally presumed to be the father under Texas family law. There are two ways to rebut the presumption: with a proceeding to adjudicate parentage or with the filing of a denial of paternity along with the filing of an acknowledgement of paternity by another person.  Suits to adjudicate parentage of a child with a presumed father generally must be brought by the child’s fourth birthday. There is an exception, however if the mother and presumed father did not live together or engage in sexual intercourse at the probable time of the child’s conception.  There is also an exception if the presumed father mistakenly believed he was the biological father based on misrepresentations. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.607.

Alleged Father Challenges Adjudication of Paternity

An alleged father recently challenged a trial court’s determination that his adjudication of parentage case was time-barred.  According to the appeals court’s unpublished opinion, the alleged father petitioned to adjudicate parentage of two children, one born in 2014 and the other in 2015.  The mother was married to another man when the children were born.

The mother moved for summary judgment, arguing the alleged father’s suit was time-barred and none of the exceptions that toll the statute of limitations for adjudication of parentage applied.  She attached her own affidavit and an affidavit from her then husband as summary judgment evidence.  Her motion was granted.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-178756342-300x199A spouse in a Texas divorce may have a reimbursement claim if they use their own separate property to fund improvements to the other spouse’s separate property.  Likewise, if community funds are used for the benefit of a spouse’s property, the spouse may be ordered to reimburse the community.  The party seeking reimbursement must plead and prove the claim, including showing that the funds used were their separate property. Courts must resolve claims for reimbursement using principles of equity.

A husband recently challenged a trial court’s denial of his reimbursement claims.  According to the appeals court’s opinion, both parties had significant separate property when they married in 2010.  The husband owned one home and the wife owned two.  They bought a new house 2014.  The husband sold his home and used $141,000 of the proceeds for the new house.  The wife sold one of her homes and used $150,000 from that sale on the new home.

Testimony Regarding Husband’s Reimbursement Claim

The husband also paid about $70,000 for a pool at the new house.  He claimed the funds were his separate property, but the wife testified she thought he had used community funds.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information