Divorce

Characterization of Gifted Property in a Texas Divorce

Published on: November 30, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

When individuals with a high net worth marry, they often bring significant separate assets to the marriage. When marriages with complex estates end, there may be disputes over whether property is community property or the separate property of one of the spouses. The trial court in a divorce must divide the community estate of the parties in a just and right manner. The trial court generally may not divest a spouse of their separate property by awarding it in whole or in part to the other spouse. Community property is the property, other than separate property, acquired by either spouse during the marriage. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.002. Separate property includes property the spouse owned before the marriage and property gifted, devised, or descended to the spouse during the marriage. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001. Texas law has a rebuttable presumption that property possessed by either spouse at the time of the divorce is community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003. The spouse claiming property is separate has the burden of proving the property’s character by clear and convincing evidence. In a recent case, a husband appealed a property division he claimed improperly divested him of his separate property.

The Property

The parties got married in 2008. The wife petitioned for divorce in 2021 and subsequently amended her complaint to allege adultery. The primary issue at trial was the characterization of a particular piece of real property.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband’s parents gave him a tract of land in 1995. The wife testified it was her understanding the husband’s parents had given the property to him as a gift in 1995. The husband testified that he had a house moved onto the land the same year.

Texas Court Appoints Receiver in Divorce with Complex Estate and International Assets

Published on: November 27, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

During a Texas divorce case, the court may appoint a receiver to preserve and protect the parties’ property. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.502(a)(5). The receiver’s role is to receive and preserve property for all of the parties, not just the party who applied for a receiver. Protecting assets can be particularly important in a complex estate involving business interests, real property and other assets under the control of one spouse. A husband recently appealed appointment of a receiver in his divorce case.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties had been married for about 12 years when the wife petitioned for divorce. The wife requested appointment of a receiver, alleging the husband had transferred community assets. The husband argued that some of the assets were his separate property and that a receiver should not be appointment when there was another available remedy. He argued the wife had filed a lis pendens on the real property.

The Hearing

At the hearing, the wife’s attorney argued the husband was a successful doctor who had transferred assets worth millions to Lebanon and Syria. She argued he had cancelled the credit card and closed the joint bank account. She stated they did not know where the money went because the husband did not answer discovery. The attorney argued the hearing was urgent because it would be hard to enforce the orders once the funds were in Syria or Lebanon, noting there had been previous injunctions against transfers of money and sales of property.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Confirmation of Arbitration Award in High Asset Divorce

Published on: November 21, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parties to a high net worth Texas divorce may choose to arbitrate disputes because arbitration can be less expensive, less contentious, and more private than litigation. An arbitration award can be difficult to challenge, however. Under the Texas Arbitration Act, a trial court may only vacate an arbitration award based on one of the grounds listed, including the arbitrator exceeding his authority. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 171.088. The arbitrator’s power is based on the arbitration agreement between the parties. In Texas, arbitration awards are presumed to be valid. When a party seeks to vacate an arbitration award, they have the burden of establishing the grounds based on the complete record. An appeals court presumes there was sufficient evidence to support the arbitration award if there is not a transcript of the arbitration hearing. A Texas appeals court recently considered a wife’s challenge to an arbitration award addressing the division of certain disputed personal property after the parties reached a mediated settlement agreement as to the property division.

The parties entered into a mediated settlement agreement (“MSA”) and memorialized it in an agreement incident to divorce (“AID”). Pursuant to the AID, the wife would receive $17 million in cash, in addition to multiple pieces of real property, vehicles, and multiple accounts. The parties were to agree in writing to the division of personal property from two of their homes and submit any items they could not agree on to arbitration. The court incorporated the AID into the final divorce decree.

Arbitration Proceedings

They later signed a binding arbitration agreement to address the disputed personal property from the two homes. Pursuant to the arbitration agreement, each party would be allowed to present a position statement orally in writing. The wife submitted a list of disputed personal property she sought to be awarded to her, including some items that were to go to her pursuant to the AID.

Financial Consequences for Engaging in Prohibited Behaviors

Published on: November 6, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parties in a high profile divorce might want to enter an agreement that goes beyond dividing the property. Celebrities, business owners, or CEOs might seek an agreement that prohibits their former spouse from disclosing private information, disparaging them or their business, or engaging in other behaviors that might damage their reputation or their business. The agreement can include liquidated damages for violations. In a recent case, a former wife, her former husband, and his business all appealed a judgment confirming an arbitration award relating to an agreement incident to divorce.

The Agreement

At the time of the divorce, the parties entered into an agreement incident to divorce providing for arbitration if a party engaged in certain conduct prohibited by the agreement. The agreement provided for an award of the greater of $500,000 or actual damages. Additionally, the wife would forfeit interest in a trust as liquidated damages if she engaged in certain behaviors. The parties agreed to arbitrate any issue of whether a party committed a prohibited behavior, whether the wife violated specified provisions in the agreement, and whether the wife’s interest in the trust would be forfeited as a result of violating provisions of the agreement. Binding arbitration was to occur within 90 days of notice of a violation. Pursuant to the Agreement, the losing party would pay the arbitration costs and the other parties’ costs and fees. The husband’s company was a third party to the divorce and to the agreement. The decree incorporated the agreement.

Arbitration Demand

The husband and his company subsequently demanded arbitration, alleging the wife violated the agreement. The wife objected and argued the forfeiture and liquidated provisions were unenforceable and that the arbitration clause was therefore also unenforceable.

Divorce Decree Entered by Submission Thrown Out For Failure of Court to Conduct Trial

Published on: October 30, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

In a high net worth divorce, the parties may want to reach an amicable resolution of property division. In a recent Texas divorce case, a husband challenged the final divorce decree that upheld the parties settlement agreement without giving him notice and a hearing.

The parties got married in March 2021 and stopped living together in January 2023. The entered into a Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) shortly thereafter.

Proceedings

The wife petitioned for divorce in 2023, asking the court to divide the estate according to the terms of the MSA. The MSA was signed by both parties and notarized. Additionally, both parties had initialed each page. The MSA addressed the division of the community property and liabilities, including personal property, real property, business interests, and debt.

Husband’s Inherited Home Confirmed as Separate Property Not Subject to Division in Divorce

Published on: October 27, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

The court in a Texas divorce case must divide the parties’ estate in a just and right manner. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001. Complex estates may include both community and separate property, acquired from various sources. The court can only divide community property, which is any property acquired by a spouse during the marriage except separate property. Separate property includes property owned by the spouse before the marriage and property acquired by a spouse during the marriage through gift, devise, or descent. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001(2). There is a presumption property either spouse possesses during or on dissolution of the marriage is community property and a spouse claiming property is separate has the burden of proof to a clear and convincing standard. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.

In a recent case, a former wife appealed the court’s property division in the final divorce decree. The parties got married in 1999 and had one child. The husband petitioned for divorce in 2017. He asked the court to confirm two pieces of real property were his separate property. The wife sought reimbursement to and reconstitution of the community estate and spousal maintenance. The court filed the final divorce decree in January 2024 and the wife appealed.

Separate Property

On appeal, the wife challenged the trial court’s characterization of the “69^th Street property” as the husband’s separate property. She argued the husband had not presented sufficient evidence to support his testimony that he had inherited it.

Texas Court May Classify Attorney’s Fees Awarded in Divorce as Non-Dischargeable in Bankruptcy

Published on: October 13, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

“Domestic support obligations” as defined by the U.S. Bankruptcy Code are generally exempt from discharge in bankruptcy. Therefore, child support or spousal maintenance generally cannot be discharged in bankruptcy and must be paid. The treatment of other types of awards that may be granted in a Texas divorce, however, may not be so clear. In a recent case, a former wife appealed a divorce decree that expressly stated that an award of attorney’s fees against her was a domestic support obligation pursuant to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

The parties got married in September 2021 and the wife filed for divorce that December. The husband subsequently filed a counterpetition, alleging adultery by the wife. He asked the court to order the wife to pay his attorney’s fees and costs and classify them as a domestic support obligation for purposes of bankruptcy.

The court granted the divorce based on adultery and awarded attorney’s fees to the husband. The court granted an award of $38,306 to the husband’s attorney and the firm. The divorce decree stated that the attorney’s fees would be “considered a domestic support obligation. . .”

Reconstitution of Community Estate Due to Waste or Fraud in Texas Divorce

Published on: September 30, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

A court dividing property in a Texas divorce may consider a number of factors, including fraud or waste of community assets by a party. A spouse may commit constructive fraud or waste by unfairly depriving the other spouse of the benefit of community assets. There is a presumption of constructive fraud when a spouse disposes of the other’s interest in community property without their knowledge or consent. A former husband recently challenged a property division after the court found he had committed fraud and waste on the community estate.

The parties married in February 2011 and the wife petitioned for divorce in July 2018. Both parties alleged constructive fraud and wasting of community assets by the other and sought reconstitution and a disproportionate share of the community estate.

The court granted divorce and ultimately confirmed $46,000 in an IRA as the husband’s separate property. The court found the husband committed fraud on the community estate and reconstituted the community estate. Included in the reconstitution was $71,483.33 for depletion of an IRA, $81,321.98 for dissolution of the husband’s interest in a limited liability company, and $17,000 for unpaid medical expenses for the children. The court also awarded the wife a disproportionate share of the community estate.

Texas Appeals Court Reverses Default Divorce Based on Errors in Service

Published on: September 26, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

A party who does not participate in a Texas divorce hearing may have a default judgment entered against them. If they meet certain criteria, however, they may be eligible for a restricted appeal. Those criteria are: filing notice of the restricted appeal within six months of the judgment being signed; having been a party to the lawsuit; not participating in the hearing, filing any timely motions after the judgment, or requesting findings of fact and conclusions of law; and an error that is apparent on the face of the record. Pike-Grant v. Grant. In determining if there was an error on the face of the record, the appeals court may only consider the evidence that was before the trial court.

In a recent case, a former husband challenged a default divorce decree based on an error on the face of the record.

Omitted Language in the Citation

If the defendant was not served in strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, rendition of a no-answer default judgment is reversible error. The husband argued that the citation did not include all of the language required by Rule 99(c). Specifically, it had omitted language stating that the party may be required to make initial disclosures within 30 days after filing a written answer and directing the party to TexasLawHelp.org for more information. An amendment to the rule added this language at the beginning of 2021. The citation was issued more than three years after the effective date of the amendment, so the language was required.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Termination of Spousal Maintenance in Lieu of Child Support

Published on: September 6, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Texas spousal maintenance is generally intended to provide temporary rehabilitative support to spouses who are unable to support themselves. The appeals court recently reviewed a case in which spousal maintenance was ordered “in lieu of child support” for the parties’ now adult daughter, who is disabled.

The parties divorced in 1998. The trial court issued a modification order in 2014 that, “upon agreement of the parties,” the father would pay $1,096.55 per month in spousal maintenance in lieu of child support, purportedly to allow the daughter to qualify for more disability benefits. Additionally, any payments received for the benefit of the child, including from the Social Security Administration, were to be credited against the spousal maintenance.

Enforcement and Modification Proceedings

Each of the parents remarried. The mother’s husband passed away in 2020. She petitioned for enforcement of the spousal maintenance in early 2022, alleging the father had not made payments from June to December of 2021. The father filed a counter-petition, seeking to terminate the maintenance based on his retirement and the daughter getting half his Social Security Old Age Benefits (“SSOAB”), totaling $1,466 monthly plus increases for cost-of-living.