Texas Divorce Attorney Blog
A court may order Texas spousal maintenance to a spouse who lacks sufficient property on dissolution and the ability to earn sufficient income to provide for their own minimum reasonable needs if the parties have been married for at least 10 years. Tex. Fam. Code § 8.051. A former husband recently challenged a spousal maintenance award, arguing the wife had not presented any evidence to overcome the presumption that maintenance is not warranted unless the spouse has been diligent in earning sufficient income to meet their minimum reasonable needs or in developing the skills they need to do so during separation and while the divorce proceedings are pending.
Divorce Proceedings
The parties got married in 2010 and had a child in 2016. They separated in November 2021 and the husband petitioned for divorce in early 2022.
By the time the trial occurred, the parties had been married for 13 years. The wife had been a stay-at-home mom since the birth of the child. She started doing marketing for her parents from home shortly before the trial because she said the judge told her she needed to start working.
She had an aesthetician license and a bachelor’s degree in general studies. She intended to start nursing school, but was still seeking admission at the time of the trial. She had not sought work as an aesthetician.
Based on the wife’s monthly budget, her monthly expenses were $8,887.50, while her monthly income totaled $3,440, including child support. She planned to use spousal maintenance to cover the deficit until she completed nursing school, which she anticipated doing in two-and-a-half to three years. She asked the court to award her maintenance for five years.
The divorce decree ordered the husband to pay spousal maintenance in the amount of $4,000 per month the earliest of the passing of one year, either party’s death, the wife’s remarriage, or further orders of the court regarding spousal maintenance.
The husband requested findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found the parties had been married for 10 years or more. The trial court also found that, according to the wife’s testimony, she had a monthly deficit of $5,447.40. It also found the wife had insufficient income to meet her minimum reasonable needs until the parties’ properties were sold. The court also found she lacked sufficient property and the ability to provide for her minimum reasonable needs. The court found she required additional education and training to earn sufficient income and noted that awarding her maintenance gave her a year to get it. The court also found she had been a stay-at-home parent since 2016 and out of the workforce for years. It found she had exercised diligence in earning sufficient income or developing necessary skills during the separation and pendency of the case. The court also found that a year was the shortest reasonable period to allow the wife to earn sufficient income to provide for her minimum reasonable needs.
The court concluded the wife was eligible for spousal maintenance pursuant to Chapter 8 of the Texas Family Code and that the husband should pay $4,000 per month for one year. The court concluded the husband was obligated to pay spousal maintenance until the earliest of the passing of one year, death of either party, wife’s remarriage, or further orders of the court.
The Husband’s Appeal
The husband appealed, arguing there was no evidence supporting certain of the court’s findings related to spousal maintenance.
In this case, the wife sought spousal maintenance under Tex. Fam. Code § 8.051(2)(B), in which case there is a rebuttable presumption against maintenance unless the spouse has been diligent in earning sufficient income or developing the necessary skills to provide for their own minimum reasonable needs during separation and while the divorce case is pending.
No Evidence of Diligence
The husband argued there was not evidence supporting the findings that the wife had been diligent in earning sufficient income and in developing the necessary skills. He argued that without evidence supporting the findings, the wife failed to rebut the presumption against spousal maintenance.
The wife had the burden of proving she was entitled to maintenance. There was evidence that her expenses were almost $9,000 per month and that she received $1,840 in child support and earned $1,600 working for her parents’ ranch. She testified she started working recently because the judge told her she needed to. There was evidence she had a bachelor’s degree and an aesthetician license, but she did not provide any evidence showing she had tried to obtain employment where she could earn more. She stated she had not applied for jobs as an aesthetician, implying there was an incident leading to a pending criminal charge that would prevent her from obtaining such employment and claiming that she “would be useless for the business” after she completed nursing school. The appeals court determined, however, that these explanations did not support a finding she had been diligent in earning sufficient income. She had not provided any evidence of being denied employment. She also testified it could take her three years to complete school.
The appeals court also determined she presented insufficient evidence to show she had been diligent in developing necessary skills to provide for her needs. She testified she planned to go to nursing school, but was “still trying to get in” as of June 2023, when the parties separated in November 2021 and the divorce case was filed in January 2022.
The appeals court concluded the evidence was insufficient to create more than “a mere surmise or suspicion” the wife had been diligent in earning sufficient income or developing the necessary skills. The appeals court further concluded the evidence was legally insufficient to rebut the presumption against spousal maintenance. The appeals court determined that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding spousal maintenance.
The appeals court reversed the part of the decree that awarded spousal maintenance and rendered judgment denying the request for maintenance.
Call a Skilled Spousal Maintenance Attorney
In this case, the wife did not present sufficient evidence to show that she had been diligent in seeking higher-paying employment or developing skills needed so she could earn sufficient income to meet her needs. An experienced Dallas divorce lawyer can work with you to identify the evidence you need. Call McClure Law Group at 214.692.8200 for a consultation.
Want the best divorce law firm in Dallas? McClure Law Group is your team.