Francesca Blackard, Author at Texas Divorce Attorney Blog

Exception to Texas Statute of Limitations for Adjudicating Parentage

Published on: October 23, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1033856542-300x200 When a mother is married at the time of her child’s birth, the husband is generally presumed to be the father under Texas family law. There are two ways to rebut the presumption: with a proceeding to adjudicate parentage or with the filing of a denial of paternity along with the filing of an acknowledgement of paternity by another person. Suits to adjudicate parentage of a child with a presumed father generally must be brought by the child’s fourth birthday. There is an exception, however if the mother and presumed father did not live together or engage in sexual intercourse at the probable time of the child’s conception. There is also an exception if the presumed father mistakenly believed he was the biological father based on misrepresentations. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.607.

Alleged Father Challenges Adjudication of Paternity

An alleged father recently challenged a trial court’s determination that his adjudication of parentage case was time-barred. According to the appeals court’s unpublished opinion, the alleged father petitioned to adjudicate parentage of two children, one born in 2014 and the other in 2015. The mother was married to another man when the children were born.

The mother moved for summary judgment, arguing the alleged father’s suit was time-barred and none of the exceptions that toll the statute of limitations for adjudication of parentage applied. She attached her own affidavit and an affidavit from her then husband as summary judgment evidence. Her motion was granted.

Texas Husband Denied Reimbursement for Repairs to Wife’s Property

Published on: October 9, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-178756342-300x199 A spouse in a Texas divorce may have a reimbursement claim if they use their own separate property to fund improvements to the other spouse’s separate property. Likewise, if community funds are used for the benefit of a spouse’s property, the spouse may be ordered to reimburse the community. The party seeking reimbursement must plead and prove the claim, including showing that the funds used were their separate property. Courts must resolve claims for reimbursement using principles of equity.

A husband recently challenged a trial court’s denial of his reimbursement claims. According to the appeals court’s opinion, both parties had significant separate property when they married in 2010. The husband owned one home and the wife owned two. They bought a new house 2014. The husband sold his home and used $141,000 of the proceeds for the new house. The wife sold one of her homes and used $150,000 from that sale on the new home.

Testimony Regarding Husband’s Reimbursement Claim

The husband also paid about $70,000 for a pool at the new house. He claimed the funds were his separate property, but the wife testified she thought he had used community funds.

Registering a Foreign Custody Determination in Texas

Published on: September 18, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1125625723-300x200 A custody determination issued in another state or country can be registered in Texas. To do so, the party must send a letter requesting registration to the Texas court, along with two copies of the determination, one of them certified, a sworn statement that, to the best of the requester’s knowledge and belief, the order has not been modified, and their name and address and the name and address of any parent or person acting as a parent who has been awarded custody or visitation under the order. Tex. Fam. Code § 152.305(a). The Texas court then files the determination as a foreign judgment. The court must also give notice to the person seeking the registration and any parent or person acting as a parent who was awarded custody or visitation in the determination and provide them with an opportunity to contest the registration. If a person wants to contest the validity of the registered order, they must request a hearing within 20 days of being served the notice. The court must confirm the registered order unless the person contesting it establishes that the issuing court did not have jurisdiction, that the determination was vacated, stayed, or modified, or that they did not receive required notice in the proceedings before the court that issued the order. Tex. Fam. Code § 152.305.

Mother’s Request for Registration of Custody Determination Denied

A mother recently challenged a court’s denial of her request for registration. She had filed a “Registration of Child Custody Determination” to register an order from New York. The New York order provided that the parties would share joint custody of the child and that the child would live with the mother.

The father filed a timely objection to the registration. He argued there were proceedings for enforcement pending in New York. He alleged that the New York court had recessed to let the mother get an attorney and rescheduled on the same day the wife sought to register the order in Texas. He argued that registering the decree in Texas would make it enforceable and subject to modification in Texas, while the New York court still had and was exercising continuing jurisdiction.

Mischaracterization of Property in Texas Divorce

Published on: September 10, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

property-division-300x110 The court in a Texas divorce must make a just and right division of the parties’ estate. This does not necessarily require the court to award the parties equal shares of the property. Property acquired during a marriage is generally community property, but property acquired before the marriage or by gift, devise, or descent is separate property. A party claiming separate property must show that it is separate by clear and convincing evidence. A husband recently challenged a court’s characterization of certain property as the wife’s separate property.

The parties got married in 1997 and the husband filed for divorce in 2019. Each party sought a disproportionate share of the marital estate.

Wife Asserts Separate-Property Claim

According to the appeals court’s opinion, a significant issue in the divorce was property purchased by the wife in 1997 after the marriage. She leased the building in 1990 and renewed the lease in 1995. After the marriage, she bought it. She testified the written lease she signed in 1995 gave her an option to purchase, but she had lost the document.

Modification vs. Clarification in Texas Custody Cases

Published on: August 15, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

5thingsdivorcecourt_header-300x163 A court may clarify an order in a Texas suit affecting the parent-child relationship if it finds the order lacks sufficient specificity to be enforced through contempt. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 157.421. The court cannot make substantive changes through an order to clarify and such changes are not enforceable. Tex. Fam. Code § 157.423. Substantive changes must be pursued through a modification suit. Generally, to obtain a modification, a parent must show there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances and the modification will be in the child’s best interest.

Mother Appeals Clarification Order

A mother recently challenged a clarification order, arguing it had made a substantive change to the previous order. The parties entered into an agreed order regarding their children in December 2016. The father moved for clarification of language relating to extracurricular activities. The agreed order provided in relevant part that the parents would put each child in a single extracurricular activity at a time and have a written agreement regarding the extracurricular activity. The court granted the motion and revised the language to state that each parent may place each child in an extracurricular activity, but, instead of referencing an agreement, the clarified order provided there would be a written designation of the extracurricular activity.

The mother appealed, arguing the court erred in granting the motion because the language in the agreed order was not ambiguous or erroneous and that the revised language constituted a substantive change.

Invited Error in Texas Divorce Case

Published on: August 8, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1270267953-300x200 Even when parties seem to agree on issues related to Texas property division, disputes may still arise. In a recent case, a husband challenged a trial court’s treatment of certain property after seemingly agreeing to that treatment during the hearing.

The husband petitioned for divorce in May 2019. The husband and wife stipulated that a particular parcel of land was the husband’s separate property, but the mobile home on that property was the wife’s separate property.

The husband testified he wanted to purchase the mobile home or sell the parcel and mobile home together and equally divide the proceeds. He expressed a preference to buy the mobile home himself but also said there were buyers interested in purchasing them as a single asset. The wife testified she wanted to sell the mobile home to the husband for $15,000 or alternatively to sell both together and divide the proceeds equally. The husband responded “Yes” when asked if he agreed to sell the parcel and the mobile home together and split the proceeds. When he was asked about division of another piece of property, he said he thought the parties had reached agreement on the five-acre parcel and mobile home and thought they could also reach agreement on the larger parcel. The trial court specifically told the husband that he was “not going to have the five acres and the mobile home. . .”

Texas Child-Support Arrearages

Published on: July 31, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-483611874-300x200 Failure to pay Texas child support as ordered can result in an enforcement action. If the motion for enforcement includes a request for a money judgment for arrearages, the trial court generally may not modify or reduce the amount of the arrearages. In a recent case, a mother challenged a court’s finding there was not an arrearage when the father argued he had shifted the payments from the beginning to the end of the month.

The divorce decree appointed the parents joint managing conservators of their two children with the mother having the right to designate their primary residence. The mother was required to maintain health and dental insurance for the children and the parties were to equally split the healthcare expenses not paid by insurance. The father was ordered to pay $1,122 monthly child support and $451.22 monthly medical child support through the Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”). The medical child support was reimbursement for the children’s insurance premiums.

Mother Files Child-Support Enforcement

The mother moved to enforce the child support in September 2020. She sought $1,573.22 in unpaid child support and $311.21 in medical expenses. She also asked for attorney’s fees and costs. The trial court ordered the father to pay $155.83 for medical expenses but denied the mother’s other requests, finding the amount of child-support and medical-support arrearages were $0 as of the date of the hearing.

Texas Appeals Court Holds Paternity Cannot Be Adjudicated After Putative Father’s Death

Published on: July 8, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

While ideally a child’s parentage is determined when they are young, that does not always occur. A Texas appeals court recently considered whether the trial court could adjudicate the parentage of an adult petitioner after the death of the putative father.

Adult Child Files Paternity Suit Against Father’s Estate

An adult petitioner filed suit against his mother, his alleged father, and the independent executor of his alleged father’s estate, seeking adjudication of his parentage and a declaration that he was the alleged father’s biological son and had the rights and privileges of a surviving child. The executor filed a motion to dismiss, arguing a suit to adjudicate parentage cannot be brought after the putative father’s death. The trial court denied both the executor’s and the petitioner’s respective motions for summary judgment.

Trial Court Adjudicates Parentage

At trial, the executor moved for judgment, arguing that suits to adjudicate parentage do not survive the putative father’s death pursuant to the Texas Family Code. The trial court denied the motion and adjudicated the putative father as the petitioner’s father.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Alcohol Restriction in Divorce Decree

Published on: July 4, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1404070235-300x212 In dealing with Texas custody issues, courts must focus on the children’s best interest. Courts sometimes conclude that the best interest of the children requires certain restrictions on the parents when the children are in their care. A father recently challenged a provision in the divorce decree prohibiting the parents from drinking at certain times.

Divorce Decree Prohibits Consumption of Alcohol

The parents’ divorce decree prohibited both parents from consuming alcohol while they had possession of the children or within 12 hours before their scheduled possession. The father ultimately appealed this provision, arguing it was an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, there was evidence of the father’s regular excessive drinking.

Discrepancies Between Texas Divorce Decree and Property-Division Agreement

Published on: June 13, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1125625723-300x200 When parties to a Texas divorce agree to a property division, the final judgment based on the agreement must strictly comply with it. The trial court cannot add, change, or leave out material terms. A final judgment based on a property division agreement must be set aside if it is not in strict compliance with the agreement, unless the discrepancy is a clerical error. An appeals court may modify a judgment to correct a clerical error. A former husband recently challenged the property division in his divorce due to a number of alleged discrepancies.

Husband and Wife Submitted Proposed Property Division

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties agreed to a proposed property division, identified as “Exhibit A.” The wife testified the division was fair and just. She agreed to split funds in the husband’s IRA equally after he was credited $90,000 as separate property and to split the funds in his “Edge” and “Smart” retirement plans equally.

The husband initially disagreed with the property division in Exhibit A, but later asked the court to approve it. The trial court admitted the document into evidence, asked the parties to draft and sign an agreed final decree.