Articles Posted in Divorce

Published on:

In a Texas divorce, there is a presumption that property possessed by either spouse during the marriage or at the time of the divorce is community property, unless there is clear and convincing evidence otherwise.  Separate property is property that is owned or claimed by one spouse prior to the marriage.

A wife recently challenged a court’s finding that certain property, the couple’s residence, was the husband’s separate property.  The property was conveyed to the couple from the husband’s son and daughter-in-law by warranty deed.  The husband and wife both testified the conveyance was a trade of real property and there was no additional consideration given.  The husband testified he traded a tract of land he owned before the marriage.  The wife argued, however, that the husband did not establish that he owned the tract prior to the marriage.

If property is acquired in exchange for separate property, the acquired property also becomes separate property. Thus, if the husband established that the tract was his separate property, then the residence would also be his separate property.

Continue reading →

Published on:

Property division in a Texas divorce must be equitable.  In dividing the property, the court may consider amounts from the community estate that a party has dissipated or wasted.  In a recent case, a husband appealed the divorce decree arguing that there was insufficient evidence to support the division and that the division was manifestly unjust and unfair.

The couple had been married for about 40 years when the wife filed for divorce.  An associate judge issued a final divorce decree in 2015. The wife filed a motion for a new trial, which was granted.

The couple lived in a trailer home on an undivided tract of land.  The husband ran his electrician business from the trailer and stored the heavy equipment he used for the business in the barn.  This real property was awarded to the husband in the original trial.  After the second trial, the property was partitioned into two tracts.  The property division awarded Tract A with the trailer to the husband and Tract B with the barn to the wife.

Published on:

Sometimes courts make mistakes.  When a Texas divorce court makes a clerical error, the court has the power to correct that error for a period of time, generally within 30 days.  If the error is not corrected before the court’s plenary power to correct has expired, it may still be corrected by a judgment nunc pro tunc. The court may only correct a clerical error through a judgment nunc pro tunc and cannot use a judgment nunc pro tunc to correct a judicial error.

A husband recently challenged a judgment nunc pro tunc on the grounds that the alleged error in the original judgment was not a clerical error.  The parties had each signed the decree and approved it in form and substance, but the wife’s attorney approved it as to form only.  The divorce court and all parties also signed another document, the Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), that awarded 35 percent of the husband’s military retirement pay to the wife.  The divorce decree did not reflect this award.

The husband petitioned the court to amend the QDRO to match the decree, arguing the QDRO was an impermissible modification of the property division.  The wife argued its omission was a clerical error in the divorce decree and that the decree was ambiguous.  The husband argued the divorce court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to modify the decree.

Published on:

A Texas divorce case is not always over when the judge signs the final divorce decree.  The decree sets forth the property division, but the parties must take action to achieve the division.  If party fails to surrender property, the other party may need to file a motion to enforce the property division in the decree.  A former husband recently challenged an enforcement order, arguing that the motion had not been filed timely and the claim was time-barred.

The couple divorced in 2012.  The wife moved for enforcement of the agreed divorce decree in 2016.  She also petitioned for breach of alimony contract.  The court held a bench trial and subsequently signed an enforcement order, ordering the husband to make the payments to satisfy the funds transfers required by the decree, to make the unpaid alimony payments, to provide health insurance for the children and reimburse the mother for the premiums she had paid, add the mother to the custodial accounts for the children, and pay the mother’s attorney’s fees.  The husband appealed.

The husband argued the portions of the order awarding funds to the wife were barred by the statute of limitations.  Section 9.003 of the Texas Family Code requires a suit to enforce division of tangible personal property to be filed within two years from the date the decree was signed or becomes final after appeal.

Continue reading →

Published on:

When a respondent fails to answer a Texas divorce petition, the petitioner may seek a default judgment granting the divorce.  However, unlike in other types of cases, the unanswered allegations in a divorce petition are not deemed confessed.  The petitioner must present evidence that supports the material allegations.  If the trial court makes findings without sufficient supporting evidence, the non-participating party may have a right to appeal in certain circumstances, despite his or her failure to participate.

In a recent case, a husband filed a restricted appeal of a final divorce decree.  The husband did not answer the divorce petition.  Only the wife appeared and testified at the final hearing.  The court entered a divorce decree that designated conservatorship over the children, addressed visitation, ordered the husband to pay child support, and divided the community estate.  To succeed on a restricted appeal, the husband must show that he filed notice of the restricted appeal within six months of the judgment or order, he was party to the suit but did not participate in the hearing, and he did not file a timely post-judgment motion, request findings of fact and conclusion of law, or file notice of appeal within the required time frames.  Furthermore, he must also show that there is an error apparent on the record’s face.  The appeals court may therefore only consider evidence that was before the trial court.

The appeals court found the husband had met the requirements for the restricted appeal.  He had timely filed his restricted appeal.  He had not answered the petition or participated in the hearing.  Additionally he had not filed a post-judgment motion, request for findings and conclusions, or appeal.  Although a hearing had been held by the trial court, there was no evidence regarding the value of the marital estate, the income and debts of the parties, the children’s relationship with their parents, the children’s ages, or the children’s residences.  The appeals court found the trial court had made factually based decisions without supporting evidence.  The trial court made decisions relating to conservatorship and visitation.  It ordered the husband to pay child support.  The court also divided the community estate.  The appeals court therefore found there was error apparent on the face of the record.

Published on:

Usually, in a Texas divorce case, both parties know and agree that they were married.  In some cases, however, the parties may disagree as to whether there has been an informal marriage.  An informal marriage can be proven by showing that the couple agreed to be married, subsequently lived together in Texas as spouses, and represented themselves as married.  TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 2.401.  Texas courts have held that evidence that the parties held themselves out as married must be particularly convincing and be more than occasional references to each other as husband or wife.

A mother recently challenged a court’s finding that she had not been informally married to the father of her children.  The couple had two children together, one who was six and the other who was 21.  The mother petitioned for divorce, arguing that she and the father married on or about 1996.  In his answer, the father stated there was no existing marriage.

At the hearing, the mother testified that she believed she and the father had agreed to be informally married when they moved in together.  She said the father introduced her to his friends and family as his wife.  She admitted, however, that she always filed her taxes as single.  She also conceded that her name was not on the deed to the house, and it instead named the father and his father as the owners.

Continue reading →

Published on:

When a court divides property in a Texas divorce, it presumes all property possessed by either spouse during the marriage or upon the divorce is community property.  Community property is all property acquired by other spouse during the marriage, other than separate property.  Separate property is either property owned or claimed by the spouse before the marriage or acquired by one spouse during the marriage by gift, devise, or descent.  Personal injury recoveries are separate property, but the community estate may recover for medical expenses , lost earning capacity, and other expenses the community estate incurred due to the injury.  The spouse asserting that the property is separate has the burden of showing which part of the settlement is separate property.  Language in a settlement agreement identifying the basis for the payment may displace the presumption of community property and create a new presumption that the funds are separate property.  In such cases, the spouse claiming the property is community property must provide evidence to rebut the presumption that it is separate.

A husband recently challenged the trial court’s property division, partly because it denied his reimbursement claim related to funds from a settlement.  He had settled a discrimination claim against his employer during the marriage.  The settlement included mental anguish, pain and suffering, and physical injuries, but did not include back pay or front pay.  He agreed to resign as part of the settlement.  He deposited the funds into a savings account.

Funds from the savings account were used to make a down payment on the couple’s home, the monthly mortgage, and the final payment.  The mortgage was in the husband’s name, but the deed was in both names.

Continue reading →

Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Property division in a Texas divorce must be just and right.  The property division may be “just and right” in a case where one party does not participate, but the court must have sufficient information to use its discretion in dividing the property fairly.  A spouse recently challenged the property division following a proceeding in which he did not participate.

One spouse petitioned for divorce in July 2017, alleging insupportability, which is the “no fault” ground for divorce in Texas.  He alleged, however, that the respondent had committed fraud on the estate and asked the court to reconstitute the community estate.  He also asked the court to confirm certain property as his separate property.

He claimed the respondent was a nonresident of Texas, but the marital residence had most recently been in Texas and he had filed the petition within two years of the date the marital residence ended (which would allow for Texas to have personal jurisdiction over the nonresident respondent).  The process server swore in an affidavit that the respondent had been served with the petition in Miami, Florida.

Continue reading →

Published on:

Property in a Texas divorce must be divided in a “just and right” manner.  The trial court has broad discretion in dividing the estate.  To successfully challenge a property division, a party must show that it was so unjust as to constitute an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.

A husband recently challenged the property division in his divorce. The husband appealed the trial court’s ruling, arguing it erred in awarding the wife what he claimed was “75% of the Community Estate.” He argued that the court had awarded her 75% of the community estate by awarding her the home the couple had lived in for most of their marriage and the surrounding property.  He also argued the court had improperly characterized real estate owned by his son as community property. Additionally, he argued the court had not considered that community work and assets had been used to enhance the wife’s separate property, that the wife damaged the business awarded to him, that she removed funds from community bank accounts, and committed adultery and domestic violence.

Fault

The appeals court first addressed the issue of fault.  The trial court had granted a no-fault divorce. The appeals court noted that the alleged domestic violence and adultery had happened several years before the separation, and the trial court could have reasonably found they were not relevant to the property division.

Continue reading →

Published on:

In a Texas divorce case, failure to follow the required procedures can result in the loss of property.  Parties should take care to identify all of the property that needs to be divided.  Additionally, if the court fails to address certain property in its findings, then the party must follow the appropriate procedures or may risk waiving that issue, as occurred in a recent case.

The parties married in 2007 and the husband filed for divorce in 2014.  He had been in the dairy business for many years and owned several properties at the time of the marriage.  The dairy sold milk and the court entered a temporary order granting the wife the proceeds from the “milk store” instead of spousal support.  She received a total of about $27,000 while the divorce was pending.  The wife agreed the husband bought some of the properties, including the dairy, before the marriage.

The wife appealed the property division.  She sought reimbursement for half of the value of taxes the community estate allegedly paid for the husband’s separate property during the marriage, the value of loans allegedly paid by the community to acquire goods and improvements for the dairy during the marriage, and the value of her separate property 401k used to improve the dairy.

Continue reading →