Francesca Blackard, Author at Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

Documentary Evidence in Texas Divorce

Published on: December 31, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1214358087-300x169 Although 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.

Dormancy of Texas Divorce Judgment Calculated From Date Payment Obligation Is Triggered

Published on: December 23, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1187184203-300x200 TEX. 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.

Texas Division of Real Estate in Divorce

Published on: December 15, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

property-division-300x110 Property 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.

Evidence Regarding Property Required in Texas Divorce

Published on: November 7, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1214358087-300x169 The 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.

Geographic Restriction in Texas Custody Case

Published on: October 31, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1175949984-300x200 When 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.

Exception to Texas Statute of Limitations for Adjudicating Parentage

Published on: October 23, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1033856542-300x200 When 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.

Texas Husband Denied Reimbursement for Repairs to Wife’s Property

Published on: October 9, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-178756342-300x199 A 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.

Registering a Foreign Custody Determination in Texas

Published on: September 18, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1125625723-300x200 A custody determination issued in another state or country can be registered in Texas. To do so, the party must send a letter requesting registration to the Texas court, along with two copies of the determination, one of them certified, a sworn statement that, to the best of the requester’s knowledge and belief, the order has not been modified, and their name and address and the name and address of any parent or person acting as a parent who has been awarded custody or visitation under the order. Tex. Fam. Code § 152.305(a). The Texas court then files the determination as a foreign judgment. The court must also give notice to the person seeking the registration and any parent or person acting as a parent who was awarded custody or visitation in the determination and provide them with an opportunity to contest the registration. If a person wants to contest the validity of the registered order, they must request a hearing within 20 days of being served the notice. The court must confirm the registered order unless the person contesting it establishes that the issuing court did not have jurisdiction, that the determination was vacated, stayed, or modified, or that they did not receive required notice in the proceedings before the court that issued the order. Tex. Fam. Code § 152.305.

Mother’s Request for Registration of Custody Determination Denied

A mother recently challenged a court’s denial of her request for registration. She had filed a “Registration of Child Custody Determination” to register an order from New York. The New York order provided that the parties would share joint custody of the child and that the child would live with the mother.

The father filed a timely objection to the registration. He argued there were proceedings for enforcement pending in New York. He alleged that the New York court had recessed to let the mother get an attorney and rescheduled on the same day the wife sought to register the order in Texas. He argued that registering the decree in Texas would make it enforceable and subject to modification in Texas, while the New York court still had and was exercising continuing jurisdiction.

Mischaracterization of Property in Texas Divorce

Published on: September 10, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

property-division-300x110 The court in a Texas divorce must make a just and right division of the parties’ estate. This does not necessarily require the court to award the parties equal shares of the property. Property acquired during a marriage is generally community property, but property acquired before the marriage or by gift, devise, or descent is separate property. A party claiming separate property must show that it is separate by clear and convincing evidence. A husband recently challenged a court’s characterization of certain property as the wife’s separate property.

The parties got married in 1997 and the husband filed for divorce in 2019. Each party sought a disproportionate share of the marital estate.

Wife Asserts Separate-Property Claim

According to the appeals court’s opinion, a significant issue in the divorce was property purchased by the wife in 1997 after the marriage. She leased the building in 1990 and renewed the lease in 1995. After the marriage, she bought it. She testified the written lease she signed in 1995 gave her an option to purchase, but she had lost the document.

Modification vs. Clarification in Texas Custody Cases

Published on: August 15, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

5thingsdivorcecourt_header-300x163 A court may clarify an order in a Texas suit affecting the parent-child relationship if it finds the order lacks sufficient specificity to be enforced through contempt. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 157.421. The court cannot make substantive changes through an order to clarify and such changes are not enforceable. Tex. Fam. Code § 157.423. Substantive changes must be pursued through a modification suit. Generally, to obtain a modification, a parent must show there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances and the modification will be in the child’s best interest.

Mother Appeals Clarification Order

A mother recently challenged a clarification order, arguing it had made a substantive change to the previous order. The parties entered into an agreed order regarding their children in December 2016. The father moved for clarification of language relating to extracurricular activities. The agreed order provided in relevant part that the parents would put each child in a single extracurricular activity at a time and have a written agreement regarding the extracurricular activity. The court granted the motion and revised the language to state that each parent may place each child in an extracurricular activity, but, instead of referencing an agreement, the clarified order provided there would be a written designation of the extracurricular activity.

The mother appealed, arguing the court erred in granting the motion because the language in the agreed order was not ambiguous or erroneous and that the revised language constituted a substantive change.