The dissolution of a marriage involving spouses who serve as co-owners or partners in a closely held business presents unique challenges under Texas law. When marital discord overlaps with corporate governance, the court must navigate the complexities of both the Texas Family Code and the Texas Business Organizations Code. These cases frequently involve high-stakes litigation where the fiduciary duties owed to a business entity intersect with the duties owed to the community estate.

In a recent matter originating in San Antonio, a jury awarded a verdict exceeding $20 million in a dispute involving a prominent automotive dealership partnership. The litigation involved long-term business partners who were also spouses, illustrating the volatility that arises when a professional partnership is entangled with a crumbling marriage.

The dispute centered on allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and the mismanagement of dealership assets during the pendency of the divorce. The divorcing couple has a variety of other lawsuits and countersuits against each other, also awaiting decisions in the Texas court system.

In March 2026, the Texas Supreme Court will implement significant changes to Rule 166a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, altering the landscape of summary judgment practice in Texas courts. These changes, applicable to motions filed on or after March 1, 2026, introduce mandatory timelines and stricter procedural requirements, creating new strategic considerations for litigants in complex civil matters, including high-asset and contested divorces.

Key Amendments to Rule 166a

The new amendments to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a are designed to clarify summary judgment practice and impose strict procedural timelines. The most significant revisions include:

In Texas family law appeals, procedural compliance is not a technical afterthought; it is often outcome-determinative. A recent Texas Appeals divorce and conservatorship case illustrates a recurring appellate principle: when the record is incomplete, the reviewing court must presume the trial court’s judgment is supported by sufficient evidence, In re Marriage of Ray, No. 12-25-00015-CV (Tex. App.—Tyler 2025). The case serves as a reminder that appellate courts do not retry cases, and they cannot evaluate arguments that are not supported by a complete record.

Factual and Procedural Background

The underlying proceeding involved a divorce and child-related issues concerning B.R. After the trial court entered its final decree, the appellant sought review in the Twelfth Court of Appeals. However, she did not request or file the reporter’s record, which contained the testimony and evidentiary presentations from the trial. That omission defined the scope of appellate review. While the clerk’s record was before the court, it did not include the evidence necessary to evaluate the trial court’s factual determinations.

Establishing a guardianship in Texas is an exacting process that requires strict adherence to the Texas Estates Code. Because a guardianship significantly curtails an individual’s legal rights, the legislature has implemented numerous procedural safeguards to protect the proposed ward. A recent decision by the Texas Supreme Court serves as a critical reminder that failing to follow these steps can lead to the eventual vacatur of a court’s order. In the Guardianship of Wyatt Daniel Endicott, No. 25-0456.

Facts of the Case

The underlying dispute involved an application filed by a father, Robert, to be appointed the permanent guardian of his adult son, Wyatt. Robert had served as the custodial parent since 2009, and he sought the guardianship on the basis that Wyatt was incapacitated due to a mental condition, In re Guardianship of Endicott, No. 10-23-00202-CV.

Texas law draws a firm distinction between separate and community property when dividing assets during a divorce. That distinction often plays a significant role in high-net-worth divorce litigation. The dispute in a recent Texas Supreme Court case, Landry v. Landry, centered on the characterization of two investment accounts held during the marriage.

Factual Background and Procedural History

The husband asserted that the accounts were his separate property because they were funded with premarital assets and proceeds that could be traced to separate sources. The wife challenged that characterization, arguing that all property possessed at the end of the marriage is considered community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.002. She supported her argument by evidencing that the funds going into the accounts during the marriage had been commingled with the original contributions and should be treated as community property.

The recent and prolonged litigation between the estate of the late actress Shannen Doherty and her former spouse, Kurt Iswarienko, is a real-world example of the survival of property claims following a party’s death. While Doherty signed her divorce settlement just one day before her passing in July 2024, the legal battle did not conclude with her death. Instead, her estate was forced to initiate litigation to enforce the terms of that agreement, divorce decree, including the sale of a shared property in Dripping Springs, Texas. The court’s finding shows that a signed settlement creates enforceable contractual rights that survive the decedent.

In Texas, while the death of a spouse generally abates a pending divorce, the existence of a signed, binding agreement or a rendered judgment fundamentally alters the jurisdictional landscape, shifting the matter from a family law dispute to a probate enforcement action.

Abatement and the Exception for Rendered Judgments

Texas appellate courts frequently underscore the critical role of financial transparency and credible evidence in divorce proceedings, particularly when child support and property division are contested. In a January 2026 decision, the Fifth District Court of Appeals upheld a Rockwall County trial court’s divorce judgment, emphasizing that digital financial records can outweigh a party’s testimony in determining income and the allocation of community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.

Factual Background of the Case

The underlying dispute involved a husband and wife regarding child support and the division of marital assets. The husband, unemployed since March 2023, claimed a net monthly income insufficient to justify the trial court’s $1,840 monthly child support award. The wife presented Cash App statements showing over $159,000 in deposits over 14 months.

Texas courts consistently prioritize the “best interest” of the child when adjudicating conservatorship and possession disputes. Under Texas Family Code § 153.002, trial courts evaluate conservatorship arrangements to promote the child’s physical, emotional, and educational welfare. The 2025 appellate decision in In the Interest of A.L.K. provides a contemporary example of how courts implement this principle when parental conflict affects decision-making. In re A.L.K., 08-23-00347-CV, Tex. App.—El Paso 2025.

Factual Background

A.L.K.’s parents, Jun and Jasmine, were divorced and initially appointed as joint managing conservators with shared decision-making responsibilities. Jasmine held primary authority over education and residence under the original 2020 decree. By 2022, Jun petitioned to modify the parent-child relationship, citing material and substantial changes, including ongoing co-parenting difficulties and inconsistent communication that could impact A.L.K.’s stability. Tex. Fam. Code § 156.101. The petition sought a reallocation of educational decision-making authority while maintaining a structured possession schedule.

High-profile divorce proceedings often test the boundary between public access and private dispute resolution. Recent reporting indicates that Ken Paxton’s divorce has been drawn directly into a Texas Senate primary contest, with political opponents referencing allegations that he engaged in multiple extramarital affairs during the marriage.

According to media coverage, the alleged relationships reportedly extended over several years and may have overlapped with his tenure as Attorney General. The reporting also highlights allegations of travel and personal expenditures associated with those relationships. Whether proven or not, these claims illustrate how private marital disputes, once filed, can migrate into public and political discourse.

Public Access to Divorce Records in Texas

Texas family law has long recognized that individuals other than biological parents sometimes serve as primary caregivers for a child. In limited circumstances, those individuals could seek court intervention by filing a Suit Affecting the Parent–Child Relationship (SAPCR). However, recent statutory reforms significantly narrow that pathway, particularly for stepparents.

In 2025, the Texas Legislature enacted House Bill 2350, which amends the standing provisions of the Texas Family Code and raises the threshold for non-parent caregivers seeking access to be heard in Texas courts. The change appears technical, but it may dramatically affect stepparent custody claims in blended families.

Standing in a Suit Affecting the Parent–Child Relationship

Contact Information