In In re Interest of JJFR, a man appealed from the denial of his motion for summary judgment, arguing there was insufficient evidence to prove his partner and he had entered into an informal marriage. In Texas, an informal (or common law) marriage under Texas Family Code §2.401(a)(2) can be proven by using evidence that a man and woman agreed to be married and after agreeing lived in Texas as husband and wife and told others they were married.

Informal marriages exist only if all three elements are present. Whoever wants to establish that there is an informal marriage needs to prove these elements by a preponderance of the evidence.

In the current case, the woman claimed there was an informal marriage and carried the burden of proof. The appellate court explained they could overturn an order on the ground of insufficient evidence only if the findings were so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence they were obviously unfair and wrong.

Continue Reading ›

In Ochsner v. Ochsner, the Texas Supreme Court ruled on a child support order that required the father to pay for his daughter’s school and to pay through a registry when she changed schools.

The couple had divorced in 2001, and the divorce decree included a child support order. The father was to pay the mother $240 each month in two installments and would also pay the daughter’s preschool directly. After the daughter stopped going to that preschool, the father was to pay the mother $400 in two installments and also pay a registry the school tuition payments. The order stated that his failure to comply could result in his not getting credit for making the payment.

The daughter stopped going to the preschool, and the father kept making the $240 per month payments to the mother. Instead of paying the registry, the father paid the new school directly, making payments that were $20,000 more than what was required by the original order. The mother was contractually obligated to pay the tuition.

Continue Reading ›

In the 2016 Texas case In re Morris, an appellate court considered a father’s request for a writ of mandamus after the mother and he agreed to the rendition of an order terminating the mother-child relationship. The adjudicated father of the child asked the appellate court to compel the lower court to vacate its order, which refused to render judgment in accord with the parents’ agreement to terminate the parent-child relationship between the mother and the child. He also wanted the court to render judgment according to their mediated settlement agreement.

In 2004, the trial court named the father and mother of a child the joint managing conservators of the child. In 2014, the child’s mother signed an affidavit voluntarily relinquishing her parental rights. She claimed that the termination of her relationship with the child was in the child’s best interests, but she didn’t provide facts in support. The mother didn’t expressly state she relinquished her parental rights.

In 2015, the child’s father filed a petition to terminate the parent-child relationship between the mother and child on the grounds that the mother had executed an irrevocable affidavit of relinquishment of parental rights and that termination was in the child’s best interests.

Continue Reading ›

In McCoy v. McCoy, a Texas husband appealed from a divorce decree, arguing that the lower court should not have denied his claim for reimbursement. The couple started dating in 2009. In the following year, they got engaged, and the husband moved to start law school. His fiancée joined him there in a rental house. They married in 2011. The wife worked full time during the husband’s first year in law school but then started going to law school as well. They both relied on student loans to cover their expenses and tuition.

Later, the husband claimed they had an agreement that the wife would pay him $700 every month and also pay for groceries and gas. He argued that she budgeted poorly and only sometimes paid this part of the expenses, and as a result he had to get supplemental student loans to cover her portion. They kept separate checking accounts related to their different law school loans.

In 2013, after the husband graduated, the wife filed for divorce. The husband responded by claiming he was entitled to reimbursement from his wife because he’d had to use his separate property to pay for her necessary living expenses. A bench trial was conducted, and the trial court divided the marital estate by awarding each of them the property they possessed and by ordering each spouse to pay his or her loans and debts solely in his or her name. The trial court also found that the husband’s request for reimbursement wasn’t supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

Continue Reading ›

Family law judges encourage those getting a divorce to enter into settlement negotiations rather than proceed to trial. Under rule 11 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, agreements reached during these negotiations are not enforceable unless they are written, signed, and filed with the divorce papers as part of the record, or the agreement is made in open court and entered as part of the record. In order to have the agreement be enforced, all material terms are supposed to be included, and they should be clear and unambiguous.

In Bush v. Bush, a Texas Court of Appeals considered the enforceability of a rule 11 agreement. The case was an appeal from a divorce decree in which the husband challenged the trial court’s award of two parcels of real property to his former wife. The wife sued for divorce in March 2013, and in response the husband filed a counter petition for divorce and moved to enforce a rule 11 agreement regarding the division of property, which his ex-wife and he had filed in a prior divorce case that was dismissed in 2006.

He subsequently moved to transfer and consolidate the current divorce proceeding with the previously dismissed case. The trial court came to the decision that the prior divorce had been dismissed by agreement of the parties and that since the parties agreed to the dismissal and signed the order, everything in the prior proceeding had been dismissed, and the prior case did not need to be reinstated into the current case. It also found that rule 11 agreements may be revoked until they are accepted by the court and incorporated in a final order, and this wasn’t done in the prior proceeding. The court also held that even if the agreement had survived, it didn’t have the specificity necessary to be enforced, although with respect to the sale of a particular piece of real property, the agreement might be enforceable through the application of contract law.

Continue Reading ›

Advances in technology are constantly changing how people work, play, and–unfortunately–cheat on their spouses.  People often ask us what tools are available to catch a cheating spouse or what tools a spouse might be using to conceal their own infidelity.  D CEO Magazine asked us how to catch a cheating spouse–or how not to get caught.  Our responses are below and also appear in the April issue of D CEO Magazine.

Q:  My spouse thinks I’m cheating. Are there apps or programs they can use to track me?

A:  Spying and cheating are hot topics in family law. With so much personal information readily available on our smart phones, it’s easier than ever to track a suspected cheating spouse. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information