Texas Divorce Attorney Blog
Texas divorces can be complicated when other potential jurisdictions are involved. A former husband recently challenged his Texas divorce, arguing the parties had already been divorced in Pakistan.
The parties got married in 2009 in Pakistan and subsequently moved to Texas. The husband petitioned for divorce in Dallas County in May 2021 and the wife filed a counter-petition. They both alleged the had been residents of Dallas County for the preceding 90 days and domiciliaries of Texas for the preceding six months.
In January 2022, the husband filed a “Notice of Filing of Foreign Judgment” and attached a “Divorce Registration Certificate” that had been issued in Pakistan on January 1, 2022. It showed addresses in Lahore, Pakistan for both parties for dates in September 2021, December 2021, and January 2022.
The husband sought a “postdivorce division of property,” claiming the parties had been divorced in Pakistan on December 25, 2021 but marital interest in certain assets had not been resolved. He alternative requested a divorce, conservatorship rulings, and a property division.
Validity of Foreign Divorce
The parties agreed on the children’s conservatorship and property division, but informed the court they had not reached an agreement on whether the divorce decree issued in Pakistan was valid.
The wife objected to recognition of the Pakistani degree and the trial court sustained the objection. The trial court rendered a final divorce decree in June 2023 and made findings of fact and conclusions of law following the husband’s request. The trial court found the parties got married on November 29, 2009 and stayed married until it signed the final decree.
Husband’s Appeal
The husband appealed, arguing the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to render a divorce decree because the parties were already divorced. He also argued the court erred in granting the wife’s objection to recognizing the Pakistani divorce because the decree was “an authentic legal document issued by a foreign jurisdiction that does not violate public policy.”
The husband acknowledged that states do not have to give full faith and credit to foreign judgments that have been obtained without due process. The husband argued the Pakistani court was not required to follow Texas due process laws. The appeals court concluded, however, that the wife was deprived of minimal due process because there was not evidence in the record that she received notice of the Pakistani proceedings before the judgment was rendered.
Minimal due process requires at least notice and an opportunity to be heard. Trial courts abuse their discretion if they recognize a foreign judgment that was obtained without due process.
The only evidence of the wife receiving notice regarding the proceeding was an email dated January 17, 2002, that stated the NADRA divorce certificate was attached. There was also a text message from the husband to the wife on September 18, 2021 that stated, “to fulfill religious obligation, I have pronounced verbal divorce today.” The appeals court noted the text message did not mention a legal proceeding. The appeals court concluded there was no evidence that the wife had “notice [or] an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”
The appeals court acknowledged that Texas courts have recognized foreign divorces, including Pakistani divorces, based on comity, but noted those courts had conclude due process had been satisfied. In this case, the wife argued the Pakistani divorce certificate was not valid and provided supporting documents. The husband provided documents supporting its validity.
The husband argued the wife had not alleged she had not received notice and referenced the “Date of Notice for Divorce” showing September 20, 2021 on the divorce certificate. The appeals court rejected this argument, noting the certificate reflected an address in Pakistan for the wife and there was no evidence she received notice of the proceeding until after it was concluded.
The appeals court also pointed out that the husband had not followed the procedures to enforce the Pakistani divorce pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 308b(d). He petitioned for divorce in May 2021, alleging the parties were married and resided in Texas. The rule requires notice of the foreign judgment within 60 days of the original pleading, but the husband did not file the notice until January 2022. Additionally, the rule requires a hearing.
The husband failed to provide notice within 60 days and the parties asked the court to determine if the Pakistani divorce would be recognized without a hearing. The appeals court also noted the husband had not preserved any complaint that Rule 308b had not been followed.
The appeals court determined the trial court acted within its discretion in determining the parties were married until it signed the final divorce decree and therefore had subject matter jurisdiction when it entered the decree.
The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
Call an Experienced Texas Family Law Attorney
If you are concerned your spouse may file for divorce in a jurisdiction outside Texas, the skilled Texas divorce attorneys at McClure Law Group can advise you of your options and work to protect your rights. Call us at 214.692.8200 for an appointment.
Want the best divorce law firm in Dallas? McClure Law Group is your team.