Kelly McClure, Author at Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

Texas Implements “Three Strikes Rule” for Refusal to Follow Custody Orders

Published on: March 18, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

In Texas, court-ordered possession and access provisions are not advisory. They are binding orders, and repeated violations can carry significant legal consequences. A recent legislative change strengthens those consequences. House Bill 3181 creates a statutory “three strikes” framework that directly links repeated contempt findings for denying visitation to the potential loss of primary custody.

Enforcement of Possession and Access Orders

Texas courts possess broad authority to enforce possession and access provisions contained in divorce decrees and orders affecting the parent-child relationship. When a parent refuses to comply with an existing visitation order, the other parent should file a motion for enforcement, and the trial court may impose contempt sanctions, including fines, jail time, and attorney’s fees. Tex. Fam. Code § 157.001; Tex. Fam. Code § 157.166.

Expanded Standard Possession is Now the Default in Texas Custody Orders

Published on: March 10, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

The default schedule for standard possession in Texas has changed. Texas custody law generally uses the term “possession and access” rather than visitation. The Texas Family Code establishes standard possession schedules designed to promote frequent contact between children and both parents. Recent legislative changes have altered how those Texas visitation schedules operate in many cases.

The Standard Possession Order Framework

Texas courts frequently rely on the Standard Possession Order (SPO) when determining possession schedules in divorce and custody proceedings. Historically, the traditional SPO provided that the non-custodial parent exercised possession on the first, third, and fifth weekends of each month, along with certain holiday periods. Tex. Fam. Code §153.312

Texas Supreme Court Reverses Parental Rights Termination Ruling

Published on: February 12, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

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.

Texas Supreme Court Reverses and Remands Divorce Property Division Case

Published on: January 21, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

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

What the Amy Schumer Divorce Highlights About Planning for Texas Divorces

Published on: January 10, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

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.

Sealing Your Case in High Net Worth Divorce

Published on: January 3, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

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.

Texas Supreme Court Clarifies When a Default Divorce Judgment Can Be Set Aside

Published on: January 1, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

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

Military Retirement and Disability in Texas Divorce Settlement

Published on: December 26, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Parties to a Texas divorce may wish to reach a settlement agreement to avoid protracted litigation and resolve their issues amicably. Divorcing spouses may enter into an agreement incident to divorce pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code § 7.006, which may generally be revised or repudiated at any time before the divorce is rendered. They may also enter into a mediated settlement agreement pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code § 6.002. A mediated settlement agreement under § 6.002 is binding if it includes a prominent statement that it is not subject to revocation and is signed by both parties and their attorneys who are present. In a recent case, a former husband challenged a divorce decree that included language that was not in the parties’ mediated settlement agreement prohibiting him from waiving his military retirement for disability.

The parties executed a mediated settlement agreement (“MSA”) providing that the wife would get 50% of the community portion of her husband’s “net disposable retired pay.”

The wife asked the court to add a provision to the final divorce decree that would prohibit the husband from waiving military retirement pay in exchange for military disability. She asked the court to include language requiring him to reimburse her if he elected to waive retirement pay and receive disability.

Business Was Not Required to Be Served in Action to Enforce Texas Property Division

Published on: December 15, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Texas Family Code, a party may file suit to enforce the property division in a divorce decree. If a party’s “rights, duties, powers, or liabilities may be affected” by the enforcement action, they must receive notice by citation. Tex. Fam. Code § 9.001.

A former husband recently challenged court orders resulting from the ex-wife’s enforcement action. The former wife petitioned for enforcement and applied for a turnover order and appointment of a receiver. She alleged she had learned that certain property on Highway 105 owned by a limited liability company was to be sold and was concerned she would not get the share of the net proceeds that had been awarded to her. She asked the court to appoint a receiver to obtain possession of the ex-husband’s property to satisfy the $5,000 judgment for attorney’s fees and to hold the property pending orders of the court distributing the limited liability company ownership or the ex-husbands ownership of any other limited liability company. She also requested a turnover order and related attorney’s fees.

The ex-husband moved for a continuance the day of the hearing. His attorney argued he was served less than ten days before the hearing and the company had not been served. He argued he was not served with a citation for the business and judgment could not be entered without service on the company. He also argued the ex-wife had filed a lis pendens against the company and that the company needed to be served to make an appearance.

Texas Court Denies Relocation of Child to England

Published on: December 1, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

To modify a Texas custody order, the parent must show that the modification would be in the child’s best interest and that there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances. Tex. Fam. Code § 156.101(a). The Texas Supreme Court set forth factors to be considered in relocation cases in Lenz v. Lenz. In a recent case, a mother appealed a court’s decision not to remove a geographic restriction to allow her to move with the child to live with her new husband in England.

Under the divorce decree, the mother had the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence within El Paso County.

The mother started dating a goalkeeper coach for an English Premier League soccer team. She told the father she planned to move to England and he petitioned for modification to be named primary managing conservator with the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence. The mother filed a counter-petition seeking removal of the geographic restriction.

The mother testified she quit her job and her fiancé would support her and the child. She said she intended to move regardless of the court’s decision. She testified the child would have opportunities in Manchester, including private school, after-school programs, and exposure to other cultures. She acknowledged the child asked her father not to “sign off” on the papers for relocation because she did not want to move.