wife Tag Archives — Page 3 of 3 — Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

Ex-husband Denied Share of Ex-Wife’s Military Retirement Years After Texas Divorce

Published on: October 7, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-543681178 Many assets divided in a Texas divorce are distributed during or soon after the divorce, but some assets, such as retirement benefits, may not be distributed for many years. Issues involving retirement benefits may continue or arise several years after the divorce is final. A Texas appeals court recently decided a dispute involving retirement benefits between parties who divorced in 2008.

Both parties were in the military when they divorced. The stipulated final divorce decree divided the husband’s retirement benefits equally between them and awarded the wife 100% of her “retirement plan” or other benefits resulting from her employment.

Husband Argues He Agreed to Divorce Decree While Under Duress

The wife petitioned for a clarification of the division of the husband’s military retirement in 2017. The husband argued he agreed to the property division under duress because the wife had threatened to tell his superiors he was having an affair if he did not agree. He claimed he only agreed because he was concerned he would face a court martial or negative effects on his chances of promotion if she reported him.

Texas Informal Marriage: Agreement to Be Married

Published on: August 29, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-926241578 A Texas common-law marriage can occur when the parties agree to be married, subsequently live together as married within the state, and represent themselves as married. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 2.401. The agreement to be married is a separate requirement that must be proven, although it may sometimes be inferred from evidence of the other two requirements.

CLAIM OF INFORMAL MARRIAGE

In a recent case, a woman appealed the dismissal of her claim of common-law or “informal” marriage. The parties had previously been married and were divorced in 2014. They subsequently rekindled their relationship later that year. The alleged wife petitioned for divorce in May 2016, claiming they had “rendered a common-law marriage” in December 2014 and had stopped living together around the time she petitioned for divorce.

The man denied that there was an informal marriage and filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking the trial court to find that the woman had failed to establish its existence. The affidavit the woman attached to her response stated the parties reconciled and agreed to be married on or about December 14, 2014. She said they moved in together and represented themselves as married. She also attached affidavits from others. She also submitted an email from the man to his child’s teacher in which he referred to her as his wife. She also provided a number of documents in support of her position. Following a hearing, the court granted the man’s motion for summary judgment.

Texas Court Grants Divorce and Denies Annulment

Published on: August 21, 2021 | by McClure Law Group

iStock-1270267953 Marriages in Texas are generally presumed to be valid. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 1.101. In some cases, however, a party may seek to have a marriage determined to be invalid by pursuing an annulment. When a person petitions for annulment, they are taking the position that the marriage was not valid and should be declared void. One reason a party may seek an annulment is if they were induced to enter the marriage through fraud, duress, or force by the other party. A party may only be granted an annulment on these grounds if they did not voluntarily live with the other party after finding out about the fraud or no longer being under duress or force. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.107. A divorce suit, however, presumes the marriage was valid, but asks that it be dissolved.

Trial Court Grants Divorce instead of Annulment

A former husband recently appealed his divorce, arguing that the court should have granted his petition for annulment instead of the wife’s counter-petition for divorce. They were both Chinese nationals living in different cities in Texas and got married days before the husband’s last interview for his green card. The wife was attending university in Odessa on a non-immigrant student visa at the time. Before the marriage, they agreed they would live apart until the wife graduated, but that the wife would move into off-campus housing so the husband could visit her. They also agreed she would move to San Antonio, where the husband lived, after graduation. She instead ultimately rented a room in Odessa.

The wife got a green card in 2016 based on her marriage. The husband became concerned she married him to speed up her immigration. He petitioned for annulment on the grounds of fraud in July 2017. The wife subsequently counter-petitioned for divorce.

Texas Contractual Alimony Claim Barred by Contract Statute of Limitations

Published on: July 11, 2021 | by McClure Law Group

iStock-1183385986-scaled Texas divorce cases can involve multiple areas of law. Contract law applies to pre-marital and post-marital agreements. Contract law may also apply to agreements the parties enter into as part of a divorce. In a recent case, a portion of a wife’s claims for contractual alimony was barred by the contract statute of limitations.

When the parties divorced in 2012, they entered into a written agreement. Their divorce decree included a provision for “Contractual Alimony,” with the parties agreeing that the husband would pay the wife $4,000 per month, payable on the first of the month with a five-day grace period before the payment would be considered late. The contractual alimony was to be paid from June 2013 to May 2015. The decree further stated that the wife could accelerate the payments if the husband defaulted and failed to cure within 30 days of receiving notice of intent to accelerate.

Wife Moves to Enforce Contractual Alimony

The wife moved to enforce the alimony requirements on March 26, 2019. She alleged the husband had failed to make the payments starting in December 2013. She asked the court to order him to pay the past due payments, interest, and fees and costs.

Property Division in Texas Default Divorce Judgment

Published on: March 7, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

images

In some Texas divorce cases, a party fails to file an answer to the divorce petition or otherwise participate in the divorce proceedings in any way. When a court divides property in a Texas divorce, it must do so in a “just and right” manner. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 7.001. However, to do so, the court must have sufficient evidence of the value of the community estate, even if one of the parties does not participate in the proceedings. Even if their spouse fails to file an answer, the petitioner in a divorce case must present evidence supporting the material allegations in the petition. If a trial court divides the property without sufficient evidence of the value of the assets to make a just and right division, the division may be subject to reversal on appeal, even if the appealing spouse failed to respond and the court issued a default judgment.

In a recent case, a husband challenged a default judgment granting his wife a divorce and dividing their property, arguing there was insufficient evidence to support the property division.

Texas Divorce Decree Must Adopt Terms of a Mediated Settlement Agreement

Published on: February 23, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

A Texas Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) that meets the statutory formalities is binding and the parties are entitled to a judgment upon it (i.e., the divorce decree must adopt it). In a recent case, a husband challenged an order issued after the divorce decree that was intended to conform the decree with the terms of the MSA.

The

parties executed an MSA. A couple of weeks after the court entered the final divorce decree, the wife moved for clarification of the MSA. She alleged the final decree did not reflect the MSA, because it failed to confirm certain items as her separate property. The trial court entered an order confirming those items as her separate property after a hearing.

The husband appealed.