Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

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. . .”

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Custody Order Treating Children Differently

Published on: October 6, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Texas custody cases involving multiple children can be complex, because the children may not have the same needs. In a recent case, a father challenged a modification that gave the mother rights with regard to the youngest child that he was awarded for the older two children.

The parents got married in 2006 and divorced in 2017. They had three children. In the agreed divorce decree, both parents were named joint managing conservators with shared possession of the children. In November 2020, the father petitioned for modification, alleging a material and substantial change in circumstances related to one child’s emotional health and welfare. He subsequently amended the petition to alleged the same regarding another of the children, and ultimately filed an amended petition seeking relief for all three of the children.

The court held a bench trial and signed a partially handwritten memorandum, with a note that the mother’s attorney would draft the final order. Although the memorandum was entered in early November 2022, the parties did not receive it until April 2023.

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.

Voluntary Underemployment in Dallas Custody Dispute

Published on: September 21, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parents are obligated to support their minor children and cannot avoid their obligation through voluntary unemployment or underemployment. If a parent’s actual income is significantly less than what they could earn due to intentional unemployment or underemployment, the court may apply the Texas support guidelines to their earning potential. Once the obligor has provided proof of his current wages, the obligee has the burden of showing intentional unemployment or underemployment. If they do so, the burden then shifts back to the obligor for rebuttal. A father recently challenged a court’s findings that he was underemployed and that it was in the child’s best interest to apply the child support guidelines to his earning potential.

The father registered a New York child support order in Texas and moved to modify the parent-child relationship. The order required the father to pay child support of $1,437.44 and medical support of $107.03 each month. He requested a reduction to $377, retroactive to the date he petitioned to reduce his arrearages.

The mother filed a motion to enforce, seeking contempt against the father for failure to pay the support and the arrearages. The court held a hearing and confirmed $85,858.87 in child support arrearages and $8,621.66 in medical support arrearages, with offsets, resulting in a total of $89,247.93. The trial court awarded the mother attorney’s fees and costs.

Judicial Admissions in Texas Custody Modification Case

Published on: September 13, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

Generally, to obtain modification of a Texas custody or child support order, a parent must show that there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances since the prior order. Texas courts have held that a parent alleging a material and substantial change of circumstances in their counter-petition has judicially admitted the existence of a material and substantial change in circumstances. In a recent case, a mother appealed an order granting the father’s counterpetition request for modification after granting summary judgment against her modification petition.

Proceedings

The parties got divorced in 2017 and entered into a mediated settlement agreement (“MSA”). The MSA named the parties joint managing conservators of their child and placed a geographic restriction of Lubbock County on the child’s residence. It stated that if either party moved out of the county, the parent who remained would get the exclusive right to designate the child’s residence in Lubbock County.

The mother got married again and moved to Indiana in September 2020. The father stayed in Lubbock County. The mother petitioned for modification giving her the right to designate the child’s primary residence with no geographic restriction and additional child support.

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.

Texas Appeals Court Affirmed Divorce Decree Characterizing Property Purchased with Inheritance as Separate

Published on: August 30, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

Under Texas family law, community property is the property acquired by either spouse during the marriage that is not separate property. Separate property includes property a spouse owned or claimed before the marriage, property acquired by gift or inheritance during the marriage, and recovery for personal injuries, except recovery for lost earning capacity during the marriage. In a recent case, a former wife challenged a property division characterizing certain property as the husband’s separate property.

According to the appeals court, the parties got married in 2018. The husband inherited about $650,000 from his mother during the marriage. He bought a pickup truck and a home with those funds. The title and the deed each listed both parties as owners.

The husband petitioned for divorce in January 2023, asking the court to confirm his separate property and order reimbursement for the home and the pickup truck. The wife alleged both the truck and property were part of the community estate.

Property Division Pursuant to Texas Premarital Agreement Turns on Interpretation of “Their”

Published on: August 28, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

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.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Equal Property Division Despite Fraud Allegations

Published on: August 20, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

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.