Business

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Appointment of Receiver for Collection of Divorce Judgment

Published on: July 8, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Sometimes a party to a Texas divorce may have difficulty collecting what has been awarded to them. Pursuant to the Texas turnover statute, a judgment creditor may ask the court to assist them in reaching the judgment debtor’s non-exempt property. The court is authorized to take a number of actions, including appointing a receiver. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 31.002. Appointment of a receiver is considered an “extraordinary remedy” and should not occur if there is a lesser remedy available. Gilbreath v. Horan. Although a receiver may be appointed in a divorce case, the turnover statute is not limited to divorce cases. In a recent case, a former wife requested a receiver to satisfy a judgment against her former husband following his divorce from his second wife.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the former husband remarried after the parties’ divorce in 2011. He and his second wife divorced in 2018. The first wife argued the property division in the husband’s second divorce constituted a fraudulent transfer to the second wife to avoid debts he owed the first wife.

The parties divorced in Arkansas in 2011. The husband was ordered to pay $250,223 to a business and $8,000 to the first wife for attorney’s fees. According to the first wife, she sought garnishment against multiple banks in February 2018 and was awarded $70,000 in one of those actions, partly based on her sole ownership of the business.

Texas Appeals Court Reverses Wife’s Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Judgment Against Husband

Published on: June 30, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Sometimes parties to a Texas divorce can get embroiled in litigation beyond standard divorce claims. A spouse may file a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”) in a Texas divorce case. To succeed on an IIED claim in Texas, a plaintiff has to show intentional or reckless conduct that was extreme and outrageous and caused emotional distress that was severe. Hersh v. Tatum. The Supreme Court of Texas has stated that IIED is intended to allow recovery in unusual circumstances where the victim does not have another remedy. Moser v. Roberts. In a recent case, a wife pursued an intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”) claim against the husband, as well as a separate lawsuit against his alleged affair partner, who had been an employee of their business.

The parties owned a plastic recycling company. The wife petitioned for divorce based on adultery in 2019 and made a claim for IIED against the husband.

IIED Claim

The jury awarded the wife $1.5 million for past and future physical pain and mental anguish pursuant to her IIED claim. The husband ultimately appealed.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Characterization and Property Division in Texas Divorce

Published on: April 20, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Characterization and valuation of property can be heavily contested issues in Texas divorces, especially in cases involving a high net worth or businesses. A wife recently challenged the court’s characterization of certain property and property division.

The husband petitioned for divorce just a year and eight months after the marriage. The court’s judgment confirmed certain property as his separate property and divided the community property. The court awarded specific items to each party, and granted a judgment for half the value to the other party, resulting in a generally equal division of the community property. The court also divided cash and bank accounts equally.

The court awarded the wife an equalization judgment of $232,878.85 and the husband an equalization judgment of $56,300. The court also awarded the husband a judgment of $80,000 for his separate property that the court found the wife had converted.

Texas Appeals Court Finds Insufficient Evidence of Informal Marriage

Published on: March 28, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Generally, the date of a marriage is certain, but that is often not the case with an informal marriage. The date of marriage affects the characterization of property and therefore a dispute over the date of marriage can significantly impact the property division. A former husband recently appealed a divorce decree, arguing in part that the trial court erred in finding the parties were married on or about January 1, 2012, which was before their ceremonial wedding.

According to the appeals court, the parties had a ceremonial wedding in January 2013. The husband petitioned for divorce in late 2020, alleging they had “married on or about January 31, 2013.” In the wife’s counterpetition, she alleged they “married on or about January 1, 2012.”

The trial focused on the marital residence, some property in Mexico, and the husband’s trucking company.

Texas Court Erred in Denying Husband Jury Trial in Texas Divorce

Published on: February 21, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Generally, either party in a Texas divorce is entitled to demand a jury trial pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 6.703. A party seeking a jury trial must file a timely request. If the jury trial is available to a party as a matter of right, the court generally must grant the request unless doing so would injure the other party, disrupt the docket, or impede the court’s business. Halsell v. Dehoyos. A party in a civil case may waive the right to a jury trial in some circumstances, including agreeing to a bench trial, not timely requesting a jury trial or paying the fee, not appearing for trial, or not objecting to a bench trial. In re Marriage of Harrison. In a recent case, a husband appealed a divorce decree after the trial court held a bench trial following his timely request for a jury trial.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties married in 1986 and the wife petitioned for divorce in June 2020. They accused each other of fraud against the community and cruel treatment. Each sought a disproportionate share of the marital estate and requested reimbursement to the community estate.

The trial court appointed a receiver to take possession and control of the assets, including rental properties and a business.

Texas Appeals Court Concludes Company Was Husband’s Separate Property

Published on: January 20, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Division of a business in a Texas divorce can complicate a Texas divorce. As with other property, a business interest possessed during the marriage is presumed to be community property, but that presumption can be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that it is separate property. In a recent case, a husband appealed a property division involving a business interest and property owned by the business.

The trial court signed a final divorce decree in July 2023 and subsequently filed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The property at issue was a 125-acre tract of land that the husband’s father previously owned. The trial court found the husband and his father each received 50 shares of company stock on the day the company was created in May 2008. A few days later, the husband’s father deeded the property to the company. The parties got married in June 2009.

Texas Court Appoints Receiver in Divorce with Complex Estate and International Assets

Published on: November 27, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

During a Texas divorce case, the court may appoint a receiver to preserve and protect the parties’ property. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.502(a)(5). The receiver’s role is to receive and preserve property for all of the parties, not just the party who applied for a receiver. Protecting assets can be particularly important in a complex estate involving business interests, real property and other assets under the control of one spouse. A husband recently appealed appointment of a receiver in his divorce case.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties had been married for about 12 years when the wife petitioned for divorce. The wife requested appointment of a receiver, alleging the husband had transferred community assets. The husband argued that some of the assets were his separate property and that a receiver should not be appointment when there was another available remedy. He argued the wife had filed a lis pendens on the real property.

The Hearing

At the hearing, the wife’s attorney argued the husband was a successful doctor who had transferred assets worth millions to Lebanon and Syria. She argued he had cancelled the credit card and closed the joint bank account. She stated they did not know where the money went because the husband did not answer discovery. The attorney argued the hearing was urgent because it would be hard to enforce the orders once the funds were in Syria or Lebanon, noting there had been previous injunctions against transfers of money and sales of property.

Texas Court Rejects Wife’s Argument Husband Sold Commercial Goodwill

Published on: July 7, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

The court must divide marital property in a just and right manner in a Texas divorce. In some cases, the parties only have tangible or clearly identifiable assets such as real estate and back accounts. In other cases, however, there may be more abstract assets involved. A former wife recently challenged a property division, arguing the court had not properly divided the assets in light of the husband’s sale of commercial goodwill.

The Husband’s Agreement

The parties got married in 1998. The husband worked as a financial advisor starting in the early 2000s. He entered into a “Non-Compete Representative Agreement” with a financial services company in late 2014. The agreement stated he would solicit security purchases as an independent contractor of the company and be compensated on a commission basis. He earned 35% for business written after June 1, 2014, and 52% for business written before April 1, 2014. He could increase his earning to 64% for business written before April if the “net GDC” was greater than $700,001. The agreement also provided that the husband could only continue business with the clients listed in Exhibit B after the agreement was terminated, but no Exhibit B was generated.

The divorce decree was signed at the end of February 2023. The court found the right to receive a greater commission for business written before April 1, 2014 was not a material asset to be divided but was income earned for services and constituted the husband’s “future separate property.” The court also found no commercial good will was transferred to the company because of the husband’s employment with the company or the agreement.

Fraud on the Community in Texas Divorce

Published on: February 10, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

Spouses have a fiduciary duty toward each other with regard to the community estate and commit fraud on the community if they breach a legal or equitable duty in violation of the fiduciary relationship. Fraud on the community often occurs when assets are transferred to a third party, but can also occur when it is unaccounted for.

If a court determines a spouse committed fraud, it must determine the amount the community estate was depleted and the total value it would have had absent the fraud. The trial court then divides the reconstituted estate in a just and right manner, which may include awarding the other spouse a disproportionate share of the community estate, a money judgment, or both. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.009. A husband recently appealed the trial court’s finding of fraud, judgments, and property division in his Texas divorce.

The Marriage

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband owned a home when the parties married in 2002.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Business Property Valuation in Divorce Case

Published on: August 28, 2023 | by Francesca Blackard

Businesses can be difficult to accurately value in a Texas divorce. A wife recently challenged a property division involving two businesses, arguing the court had insufficient evidence to make the just and right division.

When the husband filed for divorce, each party pleaded the marriage was insupportable. The wife also pleaded the husband had committed adultery.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the significant assets were a business operated by the wife, an interest in a pool-installation business operated by the husband, the houses each party lived in, two rental properties, a house in Mexico, an interest in two lots where the pool installation business was located, several vehicles, and several bank accounts and a CD.