Business

Recent Case Demonstrates Why Precise Premarital Agreement Language Matters for Business Owners in Texas

Published on: August 10, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

Texas law allows prospective spouses to alter many of the default rules governing marital property through a premarital agreement. When a valid agreement clearly defines how property will be characterized, courts generally enforce those terms rather than rewrite the parties’ bargain to achieve what might otherwise be viewed as a “just and right” result. Tex. Fam. Code §§ 4.001-4.010; Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001.

A recent decision from the Third Court of Appeals illustrates why this principle is particularly important for high-net-worth business owners whose wealth is tied to closely held companies, corporate distributions, and evolving business interests. Henry Hutcherson III v. Tina Hutcherson, No. 03-24-00297-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 19, 2026).

The Content of the Premarital Agreement

Why Financial Tracing Matters More Than Family Testimony in Texas Divorce

Published on: July 27, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

High-net-worth divorces often involve inherited wealth, family gifts, investment accounts, and closely held business interests that one spouse believes should remain separate property. Under Texas law, however, having witnesses assert that an asset is separate property is not enough.

A recent decision from the Texas Third Court of Appeals demonstrates how that burden is applied in practice. In O’Connor v. O’Connor, the court examined whether testimony from multiple family members could establish that mineral interests acquired during the marriage were purchased with the husband’s separate property.

Ultimately, the court concluded that the evidence did not satisfy Texas tracing requirements because the financial documentation left critical gaps. (O’Connor v. O’Connor, No. 03-23-00407-CV, 2025 WL ___ (Tex. App.—Austin July 30, 2025).

Texas Divorce and Business Ownership: When Spouses Are Also Partners

Published on: April 26, 2026 | by Kelly McClure

The dissolution of a marriage involving spouses who serve as co-owners or partners in a closely held business presents unique challenges under Texas law. When marital discord overlaps with corporate governance, the court must navigate the complexities of both the Texas Family Code and the Texas Business Organizations Code. These cases frequently involve high-stakes litigation where the fiduciary duties owed to a business entity intersect with the duties owed to the community estate.

In a recent matter originating in San Antonio, a jury awarded a verdict exceeding $20 million in a dispute involving a prominent automotive dealership partnership. The litigation involved long-term business partners who were also spouses, illustrating the volatility that arises when a professional partnership is entangled with a crumbling marriage.

The dispute centered on allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and the mismanagement of dealership assets during the pendency of the divorce. The divorcing couple has a variety of other lawsuits and countersuits against each other, also awaiting decisions in the Texas court system.

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 Appeals Court Reverses Property Division in High Net Worth Divorce Involving Allegations of Fraud

Published on: November 22, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

High net worth divorces and business divorces can often be contentious. In some cases, spouses may allege fraud or other improper actions by the other spouse. There is a presumption of fraud when a spouse disposes of the other’s one-half interest in a community asset without their consent or knowledge. Cantu v. Cantu. The presumption shifts the burden to the spouse who disposed of the property to show that the transaction was fair. Key v. Key. In a recent case, a former wife appealed issues related to alleged fraud and the property division.

The parties operated a jewelry business during their marriage. The wife petitioned for divorce in January 2019. The parties agreed that the fraud and reconstitution of the community estate issues would go the jury and the property division would be tried by the bench. The jury found that both parties committed fraud on the community. The jury was asked to evaluate the fairness of certain transactions from the wife to her mother and found that the wife unfairly depleted the community estate by $1,269,720.35.

The court determined the reconstituted estate had over $4.5 million in assets and over $470,000 in debts. The court allocated 50.51% of the assets to the wife and 49.49% to the husband. More than half of the assets allocated to the wife was the value of her unfair transactions as determined by the jury. The assets allocated to the husband included properties valued at about $1.9 million and the jewelry business. The court also allocated 70.36% of the debts to the wife. The court also ordered the wife to pay the husband a $131,710 equalization payment. Ultimately, the husband received 55% of the reconstituted estate and the wife 45%.

Texas Reversal of Temporary Injunction Enjoining Ex-Wife From Filing Lawsuits Related to the Parties’ Company

Published on: October 29, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

The division of a business in a Texas divorce can result in ongoing disputes, even after the divorce is finalized. This can be especially true when one party has control of the business while both parties maintain an ownership interest. A former wife recently appealed a temporary injunction enjoining her from filing lawsuits against the Company and other parties.

The parties divorced in 2019. They owned a corporation and other related entities together, collectively referred to by the appeals court as the “Company.” The divorce decree ordered the sale of the Company, and appointed a separate entity to do the sale.

The ex-wife appealed the property division in the divorce decree, and the appeals court affirmed. She also appealed a take-nothing judgment against her in a lawsuit in which she alleged the ex-husband had engaged in fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. That appeal was still pending at the time of the appeals court’s decision in this matter.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Divorce Decree Awarding Wife Interests in Oil and Gas Wells

Published on: September 28, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Evidence of property values is necessary for a just and right property division in a Texas divorce. A former husband recently challenged a property division, arguing the court abused its discretion in awarding his former wife a disproportionate share and in denying his motion to reopen the evidence.

The parties got married in 2004 and the wife petitioned for divorce in July 2023. The husband filed a counterpetition. The wife filed an inventory and appraisement in April 2024. The husband, however, failed to make initial disclosures, respond to the wife’s requests for production, or file an inventory and appraisement.

The applicable local rules required parties to file a sworn inventory and appraisement of property, debts, and liabilities at least 30 days before trial. Additionally, the version of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2 in effect required parties to a divorce to provide certain information in initial disclosures prior to a request for discovery from the other party, but that rule has since been amended.

Texas Wife Awarded Spousal Maintenance After Assisting Husband’s Real Estate Business

Published on: September 9, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

The purpose of Texas spousal maintenance is to give temporary support to a spouse whose ability to provide for their own needs has been diminished and who does not have sufficient assets to support themselves. Spousal maintenance may be ordered if the spouse meets certain statutory criteria. For a marriage that has lasted at least 10 years, the court may award maintenance if the spouse has insufficient property and lacks the ability to earn sufficient income to provide for their minimum reasonable needs. Tex. Fam. Code § 8.051(2)(B). Texas has a rebuttable presumption against maintenance unless the spouse has been diligent in earning sufficient income or developing skills to do so while separated and while the divorce is pending. Tex. Fam. Code . § 8.053(a). If the spouse rebuts the presumption, the trial court considers certain statutory factors in determining any maintenance award. Tex. Fam. Code § 8.052. A spousal maintenance award generally cannot exceed the lesser of $5,000 or 20% of the spouse’s average gross monthly income. Tex. Fam. Code § 8.055. A former husband recently challenged a spousal maintenance award to his former wife of over 30 years.

The parties married in 1988. The husband was a real-estate broker and ordained minister. He admitted his pornography addiction and past adultery to the wife in February 2023. The wife subsequently moved in with their daughter.

The wife petitioned for divorce in September 2023 on the grounds of cruelty and adultery. She requested a disproportionate share of the marital estate and spousal maintenance.

Court of Appeals Finds Trial Court’s Division of $3 Million in Business Assets Improper

Published on: July 31, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Property division in a Texas divorce can be complicated when there is a business involved. In a recent case, a former husband challenged a property division that divided assets belonging to his business entities.

According to the appeals court, the husband formed two businesses before the marriage. He said he purchased property, including rental houses in Florida and vacant lots in Texas, to be used by the businesses with money he brought when he moved from Puerto Rico. The wife worked at one or more of the husband’s businesses during the marriage.

The husband and both businesses bought and sold multiple commercial vehicles and trailers while the parties were married.

Wife Awarded Oncologist Husband’s Patent Rights and Stock Distributions Post-Divorce

Published on: July 29, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Certain assets, especially stocks or assets related to a business, may be held in the name of just one spouse, even if they are community property. In a Texas divorce, a court may impose a constructive trust requiring the spouse to transfer property to the other spouse. Tex. Fam Code 9.011 provides that receipt by one spouse of certain installment or lump-sum payments that were awarded to the other spouse in a divorce decree gives rise to a fiduciary obligation and imposes a constructive trust on the property.

In a recent case, a former husband challenged the divorce decree that imposed a constructive trust on future payments to him as stockholder in a corporation, arguing that part of the payments should be considered his separate property.

The husband was an oncologist who was involved in the development of a drug to treat breast cancer. A corporation owned the patent rights for the drug and the husband acquired stocks equaling 30.33% ownership of the corporation with community funds.