Kelly McClure, Author at Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

Texas Court Denies Petition to Enforce Provisions of 1993 Divorce Decree in High Net Worth Divorce

Published on: January 6, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

The conflict in a Texas divorce does not always end when the divorce is finalized, especially a high net worth divorce or one that involves complex assets. A Texas appeals court recently considered an appeal of a denial of a petition to enforce certain property division provisions from a divorce decree from 1993. The ex-husband was deceased when the petition for enforcement was filed, so his widow, as heir to the property, was the real party in interest in the proceedings.

Divorce Decree

The divorce decree incorporated and adopted a “Property Statement and Settlement,” an agreement between the ex-husband and ex-wife addressing the division of assets and liabilities. The decree awarded the ex-husband a particular property in Williamson Count as his sole and separate property. It provided that the ex-wife was divested of any right and title in the homestead. The ex-husband would be solely responsible for all liabilities and benefits associated with the dwelling. The decree further provided that if the husband failed to make the monthly mortgage payments, the house and/or property would be sold. “In the event of sale of said dwelling and/or acreage,” the wife would be entitled to ½ of the net profit. The ex-wife was not to be held liable for any mortgage payments, taxes, or other expenses related to the property.

The decree awarded the ex-wife 100% of the proceeds from the sale of a different property, as well as all benefits associated with it. The decree also awarded her a vehicle, jewelry, a savings account, and a checking account. All debt was awarded to the ex-husband.

Texas Appeals Court Considers Spouse’s Relationship to Child Following Same-Sex Divorce Case

Published on: December 14, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Texas divorces of same-sex couples can involve unique legal issues. Recently, a Texas appeals court considered three related cases involving one spouse’s relationship to a child born during the marriage.

According to the appeals court, the parties, A. and J., signed an agreement with a reproductive services agency during the marriage. A. gave birth to R.G.S. following a reproductive procedure using donor sperm. When A. filed for divorce in 2020, she identified R.G.S. as a child born of the marriage.

The parties entered into a Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”), pursuant to which J. was to be adjudicated a parent of the child. The court asked the parties’ attorneys to brief on the issue of whether the court could “adjudicate a second mom.”

Characterization of Gifted Property in a Texas Divorce

Published on: November 30, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

When individuals with a high net worth marry, they often bring significant separate assets to the marriage. When marriages with complex estates end, there may be disputes over whether property is community property or the separate property of one of the spouses. The trial court in a divorce must divide the community estate of the parties in a just and right manner. The trial court generally may not divest a spouse of their separate property by awarding it in whole or in part to the other spouse. Community property is the property, other than separate property, acquired by either spouse during the marriage. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.002. Separate property includes property the spouse owned before the marriage and property gifted, devised, or descended to the spouse during the marriage. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001. Texas law has a rebuttable presumption that property possessed by either spouse at the time of the divorce is community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003. The spouse claiming property is separate has the burden of proving the property’s character by clear and convincing evidence. In a recent case, a husband appealed a property division he claimed improperly divested him of his separate property.

The Property

The parties got married in 2008. The wife petitioned for divorce in 2021 and subsequently amended her complaint to allege adultery. The primary issue at trial was the characterization of a particular piece of real property.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband’s parents gave him a tract of land in 1995. The wife testified it was her understanding the husband’s parents had given the property to him as a gift in 1995. The husband testified that he had a house moved onto the land the same year.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Confirmation of Arbitration Award in High Asset Divorce

Published on: November 21, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parties to a high net worth Texas divorce may choose to arbitrate disputes because arbitration can be less expensive, less contentious, and more private than litigation. An arbitration award can be difficult to challenge, however. Under the Texas Arbitration Act, a trial court may only vacate an arbitration award based on one of the grounds listed, including the arbitrator exceeding his authority. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 171.088. The arbitrator’s power is based on the arbitration agreement between the parties. In Texas, arbitration awards are presumed to be valid. When a party seeks to vacate an arbitration award, they have the burden of establishing the grounds based on the complete record. An appeals court presumes there was sufficient evidence to support the arbitration award if there is not a transcript of the arbitration hearing. A Texas appeals court recently considered a wife’s challenge to an arbitration award addressing the division of certain disputed personal property after the parties reached a mediated settlement agreement as to the property division.

The parties entered into a mediated settlement agreement (“MSA”) and memorialized it in an agreement incident to divorce (“AID”). Pursuant to the AID, the wife would receive $17 million in cash, in addition to multiple pieces of real property, vehicles, and multiple accounts. The parties were to agree in writing to the division of personal property from two of their homes and submit any items they could not agree on to arbitration. The court incorporated the AID into the final divorce decree.

Arbitration Proceedings

They later signed a binding arbitration agreement to address the disputed personal property from the two homes. Pursuant to the arbitration agreement, each party would be allowed to present a position statement orally in writing. The wife submitted a list of disputed personal property she sought to be awarded to her, including some items that were to go to her pursuant to the AID.

Financial Consequences for Engaging in Prohibited Behaviors

Published on: November 6, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parties in a high profile divorce might want to enter an agreement that goes beyond dividing the property. Celebrities, business owners, or CEOs might seek an agreement that prohibits their former spouse from disclosing private information, disparaging them or their business, or engaging in other behaviors that might damage their reputation or their business. The agreement can include liquidated damages for violations. In a recent case, a former wife, her former husband, and his business all appealed a judgment confirming an arbitration award relating to an agreement incident to divorce.

The Agreement

At the time of the divorce, the parties entered into an agreement incident to divorce providing for arbitration if a party engaged in certain conduct prohibited by the agreement. The agreement provided for an award of the greater of $500,000 or actual damages. Additionally, the wife would forfeit interest in a trust as liquidated damages if she engaged in certain behaviors. The parties agreed to arbitrate any issue of whether a party committed a prohibited behavior, whether the wife violated specified provisions in the agreement, and whether the wife’s interest in the trust would be forfeited as a result of violating provisions of the agreement. Binding arbitration was to occur within 90 days of notice of a violation. Pursuant to the Agreement, the losing party would pay the arbitration costs and the other parties’ costs and fees. The husband’s company was a third party to the divorce and to the agreement. The decree incorporated the agreement.

Arbitration Demand

The husband and his company subsequently demanded arbitration, alleging the wife violated the agreement. The wife objected and argued the forfeiture and liquidated provisions were unenforceable and that the arbitration clause was therefore also unenforceable.

Husband’s Inherited Home Confirmed as Separate Property Not Subject to Division in Divorce

Published on: October 27, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

The court in a Texas divorce case must divide the parties’ estate in a just and right manner. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001. Complex estates may include both community and separate property, acquired from various sources. The court can only divide community property, which is any property acquired by a spouse during the marriage except separate property. Separate property includes property owned by the spouse before the marriage and property acquired by a spouse during the marriage through gift, devise, or descent. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001(2). There is a presumption property either spouse possesses during or on dissolution of the marriage is community property and a spouse claiming property is separate has the burden of proof to a clear and convincing standard. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.

In a recent case, a former wife appealed the court’s property division in the final divorce decree. The parties got married in 1999 and had one child. The husband petitioned for divorce in 2017. He asked the court to confirm two pieces of real property were his separate property. The wife sought reimbursement to and reconstitution of the community estate and spousal maintenance. The court filed the final divorce decree in January 2024 and the wife appealed.

Separate Property

On appeal, the wife challenged the trial court’s characterization of the “69^th Street property” as the husband’s separate property. She argued the husband had not presented sufficient evidence to support his testimony that he had inherited it.

Court of Appeals Finds No Harm In Trial Court Failing to Submit Mother’s Request for Primary Residence of the Children to Jury

Published on: October 20, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

When a parent petitions for modification of a Texas custody order, the parties may raise multiple issues. In a recent case, a mother challenged a modification order, arguing the trial court had erred in not submitting one of her proposed questions to the jury.

Original Modification Proceedings

The parties had two children together. The trial court initially appointed them both joint managing conservators with neither having the exclusive right to designate the children’s primary residence, pursuant to the parties’ Mediated Settlement Agreement.

The father subsequently petitioned for modification, alleging both parents being joint managing conservators was not in the children’s best interest. He sought sole managing conservatorship, or, alternatively, the exclusive right to designate the children’s primary residence.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Custody Order Treating Children Differently

Published on: October 6, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Texas custody cases involving multiple children can be complex, because the children may not have the same needs. In a recent case, a father challenged a modification that gave the mother rights with regard to the youngest child that he was awarded for the older two children.

The parents got married in 2006 and divorced in 2017. They had three children. In the agreed divorce decree, both parents were named joint managing conservators with shared possession of the children. In November 2020, the father petitioned for modification, alleging a material and substantial change in circumstances related to one child’s emotional health and welfare. He subsequently amended the petition to alleged the same regarding another of the children, and ultimately filed an amended petition seeking relief for all three of the children.

The court held a bench trial and signed a partially handwritten memorandum, with a note that the mother’s attorney would draft the final order. Although the memorandum was entered in early November 2022, the parties did not receive it until April 2023.

Texas Appeals Court Reverses Default Divorce Based on Errors in Service

Published on: September 26, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

A party who does not participate in a Texas divorce hearing may have a default judgment entered against them. If they meet certain criteria, however, they may be eligible for a restricted appeal. Those criteria are: filing notice of the restricted appeal within six months of the judgment being signed; having been a party to the lawsuit; not participating in the hearing, filing any timely motions after the judgment, or requesting findings of fact and conclusions of law; and an error that is apparent on the face of the record. Pike-Grant v. Grant. In determining if there was an error on the face of the record, the appeals court may only consider the evidence that was before the trial court.

In a recent case, a former husband challenged a default divorce decree based on an error on the face of the record.

Omitted Language in the Citation

If the defendant was not served in strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, rendition of a no-answer default judgment is reversible error. The husband argued that the citation did not include all of the language required by Rule 99(c). Specifically, it had omitted language stating that the party may be required to make initial disclosures within 30 days after filing a written answer and directing the party to TexasLawHelp.org for more information. An amendment to the rule added this language at the beginning of 2021. The citation was issued more than three years after the effective date of the amendment, so the language was required.

Voluntary Underemployment in Dallas Custody Dispute

Published on: September 21, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Parents are obligated to support their minor children and cannot avoid their obligation through voluntary unemployment or underemployment. If a parent’s actual income is significantly less than what they could earn due to intentional unemployment or underemployment, the court may apply the Texas support guidelines to their earning potential. Once the obligor has provided proof of his current wages, the obligee has the burden of showing intentional unemployment or underemployment. If they do so, the burden then shifts back to the obligor for rebuttal. A father recently challenged a court’s findings that he was underemployed and that it was in the child’s best interest to apply the child support guidelines to his earning potential.

The father registered a New York child support order in Texas and moved to modify the parent-child relationship. The order required the father to pay child support of $1,437.44 and medical support of $107.03 each month. He requested a reduction to $377, retroactive to the date he petitioned to reduce his arrearages.

The mother filed a motion to enforce, seeking contempt against the father for failure to pay the support and the arrearages. The court held a hearing and confirmed $85,858.87 in child support arrearages and $8,621.66 in medical support arrearages, with offsets, resulting in a total of $89,247.93. The trial court awarded the mother attorney’s fees and costs.