Divorce

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 Court Cannot Stop Divorce Trial Without Allowing Parties to Present Their Cases

Published on: July 6, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

judge-and-gavel-in-courtroom-171096040-583b48533df78c6f6af9f0e3-300x225 While videoconferencing technology allowed certain court proceedings to occur and cases to move forward during the pandemic when in-person proceedings were not available, the technology is not without its problems in a court setting. Some individuals, especially those living in rural areas, may not have access to a strong internet connection. Others may not have appropriate devices or know how to use the technology. Another serious issue can be control of the courtroom, including technical issues, distractions, and disruptions by parties or non-parties. In a recent case, a wife challenged a divorce decree because judgment was rendered after the trial was stopped during the presentation of her case.

Divorce Trial Held Over Zoom – and Stopped Abruptly

The divorce case was held over Zoom without a jury. The wife was the first witness, and the husband kept interrupting, often accusing the wife of lying. The trial judge was unable to stop him and ultimately stopped the trial before the wife had finished presenting her case. The trial judge stated she would grant the divorce and divide the property.

The final divorce decree was signed on January 29, 2021. The decree granted the divorce and the wife’s name change. It also divided the assets and liabilities. The wife moved for a new trial, arguing the trial had been stopped early. The husband died less than two months after the decree was signed. The wife subsequently appealed.

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.

Texas Court Dismisses Case Seeking to Void Divorce Due to Bigamy

Published on: May 22, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-545456068-300x184 A party may challenge a judgment as void through either a collateral or direct attack. Generally, a Texas divorce decree is only subject to collateral attack if the court lacked jurisdiction over the parties or subject matter. Other errors must be challenged through a direct attack. A direct attack can be either a pleading filed in the original case while the trial court still has plenary power or a timely-filed bill of review under a new cause number. A bill of review is generally the only appropriate method of direct attack after the trial court’s plenary power has expired.

Husband Seeks to Set Aside Divorce Decree

In a recent case, a husband filed a separate lawsuit seeking to have the divorce decree set aside, arguing the marriage and decree were both void due to the wife’s bigamy.

A trial court had denied the husband’s request for annulment based on fraud, but granted his petition for divorce in March 2019. The court also awarded the wife certain assets. The following month, the wife was indicted for bigamy. The indictment alleged she had still been married to someone else when she married the husband in 2017. The husband was ordered to pay her attorney’s fees and spousal support in June 2019. In July, the wife petitioned for enforcement.

Life Insurance and Texas Divorce

Published on: May 8, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

2018_10_agreement-300x165 People commonly obtain life-insurance policies and name their spouse as the beneficiary. They do not always remember to update the beneficiary designation when they get divorced. Under Texas law, designation of a spouse as beneficiary before a divorce will only remain effective after the divorce in certain circumstances. Generally, either the court or the insured must designate the former spouse as beneficiary, or the former spouse must be designated to receive the proceeds in trust for a child or dependent’s benefit. In a recent case, an ex-wife challenged a court awarding a life-insurance policy on the ex-husband to the ex-husband many years after the original divorce.

Insurance Policy Not Divided in Divorce

During the marriage, the parties obtained a life insurance policy on the husband with the wife named as beneficiary. The policy was not addressed in the divorce decree in 2009. The husband subsequently filed a bill of review, and the parties agreed to be co-owners of the policy. They agreed the wife would receive half of the proceeds and the rest would go into a trust for their children. The court ordered the parties to split the policy into two, but the insurance company was unable to do so.

The husband then filed for declaratory judgment, seeking to be named the sole owner of the policy. He also asked for a temporary restraining order against both the wife and the insurer. Alternatively, he sought to divide undivided property. The wife’s counter-petition also sought a declaratory judgment that the policy was her separate property and to divide undivided assets.

Condition Precedent to Receiving Contractual Support Payments in Texas Divorce Agreement

Published on: April 24, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1125625723-300x200 When parties to a Texas divorce reach an agreement, the agreement may place conditions on certain obligations. A “condition precedent” is something that must occur before a party has a right to performance of an obligation by the other party. In a recent case, a mother challenged a trial court’s finding she had not met the condition precedent to receive certain payments from the father.

In the final divorce decree, the trial court approved and incorporated the parties’ Agreement Incident to Divorce (“AID”). The parties agreed the father would pay $11,500 in monthly Contract Support Payments to the mother to provide her and the two children an “alternative lifestyle.” They would travel and live abroad so the children could learn other languages and cultures. The mother agreed to maintain this lifestyle and spend the Contract Support Payments to support it as a condition precedent to receiving the payments. The AID also included a provision that the father could send a notice if the mother failed to comply with a material term or condition. If she failed to cure the breach within 30 days, the Contract Support Payments would be abated until she complied.

Father Grows Concerned About Children’s Upbringing

The mother and children traveled within the U.S. and several countries abroad until July 2018. The father grew concerned about the children’s lack of structured education and their health and hygiene by the summer of 2018.

Separate Property and Tort Claims in Texas Divorce

Published on: April 7, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

Divorce-property-fraud-300x273 Property in the possession of either spouse at the time of dissolution of marriage is presumed to be community property under Texas family law. A spouse may rebut this presumption by tracing and clearly identifying the separate property. That spouse must present evidence of the time and means of acquisition of the property. The property remains separate if the spouse can trace the assets back to separate property. Testimony is generally not enough to overcome the community-property presumption. The spouse must have clear and convincing evidence the property is separate. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.

An appeals court recently considered tort claims within a divorce case arising from the purchase of a business. When the parties married in 2014, the wife owned a 49% interest in her optometry practice. She offered to buy the remaining interest in 2015. Her husband and another attorney in his firm helped negotiate the deal.

Wife Brings Tort Claims in Divorce Suit

The wife petitioned for divorce in September 2018. She added claims of fraud, theft, and breach of fiduciary duty to her petition, arguing husband failed to structure that purchase as separate property and allowed her separate property to be converted to community property.

Texas Final Divorce Decree Constituted Consent Judgment after Revocation of MSA

Published on: April 3, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

“A scroll of a Divorce Decree, tied with a black ribbon on a mahogany desk, with a dead white rose buttonhole from the Wedding Day, with a black pen. Copy space..”

A Texas Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) must generally include language that it is not subject to revocation, be signed by each party, and be signed by the party’s attorney who is present at the time of execution. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.602(b). If the MSA meets these requirements, it is binding and the court must render a divorce decree adopting it. The judgment must be compliant with the agreement and must not substantively alter it. The parties may revise or repudiate the agreement before the divorce is rendered, unless the agreement is otherwise binding under another law. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.006.

In a recent case, a former wife appealed a divorce decree, arguing the court erred in rendering judgment on a settlement after she revoked her consent. The parties had reached an agreement at mediation and signed an MSA, but only the husband’s attorney’s signature was on the document.

Wife Revokes Consent to MSA

The wife filed a revocation of consent and an objection to the entry of a final divorce decree. She argued the agreement was not valid without her counsel’s signature and was therefore revocable.

Texas Divorce Abated Upon Husband’s Death

Published on: March 20, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1270267953-300x200 When a party in a Texas civil lawsuit dies, the case may proceed if the cause of action survives the death of the party. Tex.R.Civ.P. 150. Generally, when the defendant in Texas civil lawsuit dies, the plaintiff may petition for a “scire facias” to require the administrator, executor, or heir to defend the lawsuit. Tex. R. Civ. P. 152. Pursuant to case law, however, Texas divorce cases are not subject to this rule because they are personal actions that do not survive the death of a party if judgment has not yet been rendered. Generally, heirs do not take over a divorce case prior to final judgment. Instead the divorce case abates when a party dies. This means the court will dismiss the case.

Husband Dies During Divorce Suit

A wife recently challenged a trial court’s determination that her divorce petition abated upon her husband’s death. The parties had married for about seven years when they divorced in 2000. In 2018, they got married again. The parties did not have any children together, but the husband had children from a previous marriage. The wife petitioned for divorce in May of 2020. The husband filed an answer, but passed away the following January. The wife sought to have the husband’s children defend the divorce on the husband’s behalf as his heirs.

The trial court found it did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to proceed, because a divorce petition, as a personal action, abates upon the death of either party. A judgment rendered by a court without subject-matter jurisdiction is void.

Texas Appeals Court Finds Wife Did Not Convert Inheritance to Community Property

Published on: March 2, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

2018_10_agreement-300x165 In Texas, separate property can be converted to community property by a written agreement signed by both spouses that identifies the property to be convert and specified it is being converted to community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 4.203. In a recent case, a former husband challenged the property division in his divorce decree, arguing certain assets had been improperly characterized as the wife’s separate property.

The wife was beneficiary of three irrevocable trusts set up by her grandparents. The income from the trusts was to be distributed to the wife at least annually starting when she turned 21. The trustee was also authorized to distribute principal for the wife’s care, comfort, support, and education if the trustee deemed it necessary. When she turned 32, the trustee had the discretion to distribute the balance. After the wife’s thirty-second birthday, which occurred during the marriage, the trustee terminated the trusts and put the accounts in her name. They were worth about $2.3 million at the time.

The parties hired an estate-planning attorney. They both signed an engagement letter, stating they told the attorney they considered the current assets, specifically including the funds inherited by the wife, to be community property. The trust agreement stated that the trustors contemplated that all assets that would be transferred to the trust would be community property. However, it also included a provision allowing either party to modify, revoke, or terminate the agreement with respect to any of their own separate property held in the trust. They subsequently transferred the assets from the grandparents’ trusts to the new trust account.