The Texas Supreme Court has reversed the outcome in a lawsuit filed by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services seeking termination of a mother’s parental rights. The case proceeded to trial following the child’s removal from the mother’s care based on allegations involving substance abuse and domestic violence towards another child in the home. By the time the case reached trial, however, the Department’s position had changed.

During the trial, the Department’s representative testified twice that the Department was not seeking termination and instead requested conservatorship relief that would appoint the father as sole managing conservator while leaving the mother as a parent non-conservator.

Despite that testimony, the trial court entered a final order terminating the mother’s parental rights. The court of appeals affirmed the termination, concluding that the trial court was not bound by the Department’s statements at trial.

In a recent Fourth Court of Appeals case, In the Interest of S.I.S.F., the court reviewed a final judgment regarding a geographic residence restriction in a conservatorship case. The trial court imposed a restriction limiting the child’s primary residence to Bexar County and contiguous counties. The mother appealed that restriction, claiming that a child’s domicile should follow that of the custodial parent. The appeals court affirmed, concluding the restriction was consistent with the Texas Family Code regarding the child’s best interests.

The case illustrates the narrow role appellate courts play in Texas family law cases. A party may appeal a final order in a Texas family law case, including conservatorship and possession orders, as in other civil cases. Tex. Fam. Code § 109.002.

Standard of Review in Texas Family Law Appeals

The trend of couples over age 50 choosing to dissolve long-term marriages, commonly called “gray divorce,” has increased across the United States, and we’re now seeing it here in Texas. Recent demographic data show a growing divorce rate for older Texans, even as overall divorce rates have declined nationwide.

Dividing Property

It’s common for gray divorces to happen after decades of marriage, presenting unique considerations and challenges in the divorce process. These divorces often involve decades of accumulated assets and retirement benefits, and how Texas addresses community property in divorce has a particularly significant impact on long marriages.

Even after a divorce decree becomes final, disputes may arise regarding compliance with the decree’s property provisions. In a recent case, the Texas Supreme Court examined whether a trial court properly exercised its jurisdiction under Chapter 9 of the Texas Family Code when enforcing a divorce decree involving community property. Morrison v. Morrison, No. 24-0053 (Tex. Jan. 30, 2026)

The parties’ divorce decree awarded each spouse defined interests in the marital estate, including the marital residence. After the divorce, a dispute arose concerning one spouse’s alleged failure to maintain property awarded under the decree, which ultimately affected the value of the marital home. The aggrieved spouse sought relief in the trial court, alleging a violation of the decree and requesting enforcement.

Enforcement Versus Modification

Public reporting indicates that actress Lori Loughlin sold a luxury Palm Desert property after announcing her intention to divorce Mossimo Giannulli in 2025. There was no public dispute between Loughlin and Giannulli over the sale of their home, which is notable because our attorneys often see disputes over high-value real estate—whether it should be sold, retained, or awarded to one spouse. These questions frequently fuel property division litigation in Texas divorces.

Texas is a community property state, and trial courts must divide community property in a manner that is “just and right.” A ‘just and right’ division requires the trial court to divide the marital estate equitably. “Just and right”, as established in a Supreme Court of Texas case, Murff v. Murff, does not always mean an equal division, particularly in high-net-worth cases involving complex assets. (Citation: Murff v. Murff, 615 S.W.2d 696, 699 (Tex. 1981).)

Our Texas family law attorneys follow a multi-step process to determine how real estate should be divided upon divorce, and to ensure the fair division of real estate (and other assets) for our clients.

Amy Schumer and Chris Fischer have announced on social media that they are divorcing after seven years of marriage. Let’s evaluate the dissolution of this marriage from the perspective of a family law attorney.

Even prior to the marriage, Schumer was an internationally famous comedian. Fischer is successful in his own field as a James Beard Foundation Award-winning chef, though Schumer’s net worth dwarfs Fischer’s at the time of writing. These facts matter when weighing the division of assets and debts, though a more penetrating accounting would be necessary.

It’s unclear whether the couple signed any pre- or post-marital agreements, as they never publicly commented on this facet of their relationship. This question piques our interest because pre-marital agreements, post-marital agreements, and pre-divorce planning simply carry higher stakes in terminations involving high-income spouses with significant assets (and possibly debts) to gain or lose.

Texas trial courts have broad discretion in conservatorship decisions, particularly when the record reflects that the ongoing conflict between parents isn’t in the best interests of the involved children. In a recent case, the Third Court of Appeals reaffirmed that discretion by upholding a conservatorship ruling despite one parent’s objections to the conduct of the proceedings.

The case involved a contested conservatorship proceeding between a separating husband and wife, co-parents of two young children. Throughout their legal battle, the trial court issued multiple temporary orders addressing conservatorship and possession of the children.

Initially, both parents were named temporary joint managing conservators, but the husband was granted the exclusive right to designate the children’s primary residence. As the parents continued to have challenges, later court orders imposed restrictions on the wife’s possession and visitation rights.

Texas family law proceedings are generally open to the public, but parties in high-net-worth divorces frequently seek to shield sensitive financial and personal information from disclosure. A recent dispute surrounding the divorce records of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Texas Senator Angela Paxton illustrates how courts approach requests to seal family law records when privacy concerns collide with public access.

The Dispute Over Sealed Divorce Records

At the start of their divorce proceedings, the Paxtons requested that their court records be sealed. Media organizations then sought to unseal records from their divorce proceedings on the basis of the public’s interest and governmental accountability.

Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:

The Supreme Court of Texas has weighed in on the thorny question of when a default divorce judgment should be undone. In a recent case, a husband filed for divorce and sought to serve his wife with divorce papers. At the time, the wife was residing at her parents’ house with their child. After attempts at personal service were unsuccessful, the trial court authorized service by alternative means.

Despite the alternative service, the wife remained unaware that she had been served and did not file an answer. The trial court entered a default divorce decree, dividing the parties’ property.

Motion for New Trial

Sometimes, a spouse may fail to take appropriate action when their spouse has filed for divorce.  If the spouse fails to participate in the proceedings, the petitioning spouse may seek a default divorce decree.  Texas law disfavors default judgments, and in some cases, a default judgment may be set aside.  The Texas Supreme Court of Texas recently considered a case in which the wife sought to set aside a default divorce decree.

The parties had been married for 13 years when the wife moved in with her parents due to alleged mistreatment by the husband.  The husband petitioned for divorce and informed the wife that he had done so.  The wife testified she did not have money for an attorney and did not know what to do.  She said she thought she would be served in person.  Her father said they waited for service of process.

According to the appeals court, there were multiple unsuccessful attempts of service over several months, and the trial court ultimately authorized alternative service.  The papers were posted on the front door at the wife’s parents’ home, but she did not file a timely answer.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information