Articles Posted in Property

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 “69th 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.

Continue Reading ›

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.

Continue Reading ›

Property’s characterization as either separate or community property in a Texas divorce is generally determined by its character at inception.  The Texas Family Code includes a presumption that property either spouse possesses during or on dissolution is community property.  Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003(a).  The Code defines “community property” as the property acquired during the marriage by either spouse, except separate property.  § 3.002.  Personal income and income produced by separate property is generally community property.  Spouses may, however, enter contracts changing their rights and obligations with regard to property. Although premarital agreements are contracts and generally interpretated according to the rules of contract interpretation, they are narrowly construed in favor of the community estate. A former husband recently appealed the property division in his divorce, argued the court had failed to apply the terms of the premarital agreement.

Premarital Agreement

The parties had signed a premarital agreement two days before their wedding.  The husband drafted the agreement based on a form from the internet.  The agreement was partially typed and partially handwritten.  The agreement included a Separate Property Provision that provided that the separate property each party brought to the marriage would stay their separate property.  It also included an Acquired Property Provision that provided, “All property acquired by each during the marriage shall be deemed [th]eir property.” The agreement also stated that the husband’s 401(k), along with “income profits, Deferred Retirement Option (D.R.O.P.) or any benefits of any kind accruing from it” would remain his separate property.  The agreement further provided that the wife’s “personal income or retirement will remain her separate property.”

The dispute was over the meaning of the Acquired Property Provision, specifically related to the marital home and a vehicle. The husband bought the house four years into the marriage with funds received from the sale of a house in Hurst, Texas, he had purchased with his separate property in 2006.  The parties had lived in the home in Hurst from 2006 until 2014. The wife said she paid for improvements to both.

Continue Reading ›

A trial court in a Texas divorce must divide the community estate in a just and right manner.  The court has broad discretion in determining what is just and right, and, when there is a reasonable basis for doing so, the court may order a disproportionate division.  The court may consider a party’s claims for waste or fraudulent transfer of community property in its property division. Waste, or constructive fraud,  occurs when one spouse wrongfully depletes the community estate without the knowledge or consent of the other spouse.  Actual fraud occurs when a spouse transfers community property or uses community funds for the primary purpose of depriving the other spouse of their use and enjoyment. A reimbursement claim arises when the assets of one estate are used for the benefit of another estate without benefit to the first, such as community funds being used to pay for repairs to one spouse’s separate property.  A former wife recently appealed the property division in her divorce, arguing the court abused its discretion by not awarding her a disproportionate share due to her fraud and reimbursement claims.

Divorce Proceedings

According to the appeals court, the parties each owned property when they married and acquired property together during the marriage.  The husband granted a gift deed to a half interest in his separate property, identified by the court as “Bayou Shore.” The wife’s separate property was sold to her brother to resolve a community debt during the marriage.

Both parties alleged fraud and made claims for reimbursement and waste.

Continue Reading ›

After rendering a Texas divorce decree, the trial court retains continuing subject-matter jurisdiction to enforce its property division.  Tex. Fam. Code § 9.002.  The court may issue additional orders to enforce the property division. Tex. Fam. Code § 9.006. An order to enforce may help in implementing or clarify the previous order, but it may not make substantive changes to the property division.  Tex. Fam. Code §  9.007.  The court generally has broad discretion to enforce the property division.

In a recent case, a former husband appealed a court order requiring him to sign documents to effectuate the transfer of stocks that were awarded to the wife in the divorce.

The divorce decree awarded the wife all shares of a particular stock owned by the husband or in his name.  It also ordered the husband to appear at a particular law office on or before September 15, 2022 to sign the documents to transfer the shares.

Continue Reading ›

Community property is the property acquired by other spouse during the marriage, except separate property.  Tex. Fam. Code § 3.002.  Separate property is generally that property the spouse owned or claimed prior to the marriage, property acquired by gift, devise, or descent during the marriage, and personal injury recoveries with the exception of recovery for lost earning capacity during the marriage. There is a presumption that property possessed by either spouse during or on dissolution is community property.  This presumption can only be rebutted in a Texas divorce by clear and convincing evidence. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003. Separate property remains separate as long as the community presumption is overcome by tracing the assets back to separate property.  Mischaracterizing property and awarding a spouse’s separate property to the other spouse constitutes an abuse of discretion and reversible error by a trial court in a divorce.  A husband recently appealed the property division in his divorce, arguing the trial court had mischaracterized some of his separate property as community property.

Property Division

The parties had been married about nine years when the wife filed for divorce.  In his counterpetition, the husband asked the court to confirm certain property was his separate property. The trial was focused on the property division, included two houses and an individualized retirement account (“IRA”). The trial court awarded one house to each party and ordered that the spouse awarded each house was responsible for the balance of that house’s mortgage.  The court also ordered the IRA funds be split equally. The trial court confirmed certain home furnishings were the wife’s separate property and a sword stand and orange sofa were the husband’s separate property.

Courts are required to divide marital estates in a just and right manner in a Texas divorce.  A court may divide the estate unequally, but must have a reasonable basis to do so.  Courts may consider a number of factors in making that determination, including the parties’ relative physical conditions, their relative financial conditions, disparity in their ages, the value of their separate estates, disparity in income or earning capacity, and the nature of the property.  A husband recently appealed a disproportionate division.

Divorce Proceedings

The parties were married for 27 years and their children were all adults at the time of the divorce.  The husband had been working for the Border Patrol since September 2022 and participated in the Federal Employees Retirement System (“FERS”).  He testified he was not eligible to collect the benefits yet.  He also testified he contributed to a Thrift Savings Plan, which is similar to a 401(k) for civil servants, with a balance of $135,734.73.  His net earnings, not including overtime, were $4,500.34 per month.  Tax records showed he earned $114,626.75 from his job as a border patrol agent in 2017 and $120,674.96 in 2018.  He also testified he prepared taxes as a side job and earned an extra $24,800 in 2019.

The wife testified she was earning a monthly net income of $1,807.64, totaling $21,691.68 per year.  She testified she had $2,229.97 in monthly expenses.  The husband disagreed with her net monthly earnings, but agreed it was insufficient to cover her monthly expenses. The wife also testified her retirement account was worth $6,168.78.

Continue Reading ›

When retirement accounts are an issue in a Texas divorce, the court will generally issue a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (“QDRO”).  A QDRO is an order that creates, recognizes, or assigns rights of an alternate payee to receive benefits from another person’s retirement plan.  Although a QDRO is often issued during the divorce, in some cases, a court may enter a post-judgment QDRO.  A former wife recently challenged a post-judgment QDRO, arguing it was void.

The parties had been married around nine years when the wife petitioned for divorce.  The trial court awarded the wife all sums, increases, proceeds, and other rights related to her employee retirement accounts, except $10,000 from her Teacher Retirement System (“TRS”) account went to the husband.  The divorce decree was signed on March 27, 2019 and the divorce was effective October 31, 2018.

Husband Seeks QDRO

The husband filed a proposed order on June 3 in the divorce case seeking a QDRO but did not serve the wife.  The court entered an order a few days later designating the husband alternate payee of the wife’s TRS plan and stating he was not to “receive more than a total of $10,000 plus interest. . ..”

Continue Reading ›

Parties to a Texas divorce may enter into an “agreement incident to divorce” regarding property division, liabilities, and spousal maintenance.  If the court finds the agreement’s terms are just and right, they become binding and the court may set forth the agreement or incorporate it by reference in the final divorce decree.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 7.006.  A former husband recently appealed a postdivorce property division order that found the marital home was the wife’s separate property, based on an agreement between the parties.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the agreement signed by the parties during the divorce proceedings stated that the marital home was community property, but that the parties agreed the wife would become its owner and assume the mortgage.  It further stated the husband granted, conveyed, and gave his interest in the property to the wife and agreed to executed any documents needed to effectuate and document the conveyance.  The husband moved out.

The final divorce decree did not address the home’s ownership.  The husband subsequently petitioned for postdivorce property division.  The trial court found the home was the wife’s separate property.  The husband requested findings of fact and conclusions of law.  The findings identified the home as the wife’s separate property.  The husband asked for additional findings and conclusions, but the trial court did not file any additional or amended findings.  He appealed.

Continue Reading ›

A party to a Texas divorce is entitled to reimbursement to the marital estate when community time, labor, or skills are used to benefit the other party’s separate estate beyond what is needed for maintenance of the separate property.  The trial court has broad discretion to apply equitable principles.  A former wife recently challenged a divorce decree that granted her former husband’s requests for reimbursement and reconstitution of the community estate.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband requested a disproportionate share of the community property and reimbursement to both the community estate and his separate estate.  He argued the wife’s separate estate had benefited from both the community and his separate estate.  He also alleged the wife conspired with her daughter “to accomplish an unlawful purpose and/or to accomplish a lawful purpose by unlawful means” to dispose of the proceeds from the sale of a house. He sought actual and exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees.

The wife also requested a disproportionate share of the community estate. She argued the civil conspiracy claim was barred by both the statute of limitations and the statute of frauds.  She also argued that the parties freely granted their interest in the property to her daughter and that the husband had agreed to and ratified her actions.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information