Divorce

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.

Enforcement of High Net Worth Texas Divorce

Published on: February 20, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1139699594-300x200 When a couple has complex and high-value assets, the actions required to achieve the property division may drag out long after their Texas divorce. The parties may need to refinance or liquidate certain assets. These ongoing transactions can result in additional disputes and possibly enforcement actions by one or sometimes both parties.

A husband recently challenged a court’s order in favor of the wife in dualling enforcement motions. The trial court entered an Agreed Final Decree of Divorce in March 2019. The decree awarded the wife a business, but required her to pay the husband a $770,000 equalization judgment secured by her primary residence and rental properties. She was also ordered to make monthly payments with 3% interest starting in February 2019. She defaulted in 2020, triggering an acceleration clause.

The decree also addressed the parties’ 2017 tax return and liability. The wife would pay $60,000 of the approximate $199,000 liability and any penalties and interest “arising solely out of the failure to previously make the $60,000 payment to the Internal Revenue Service.” The parties would split the remaining tax liability, penalties, and interest equally. The wife consented to filing the tax return in June of 2019, but the husband asked to review certain documents before he consented. There was evidence he received the documents in the summer of 2020 and notified the wife and accountant he had identified additional medical expenses within a week of receipt. He ultimately gave his consent to file the day before the enforcement hearing.

Ex-Wife Entitled to Ongoing Interest in Ex-Husband’s Defined Benefit Retirement Plan

Published on: January 31, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1187184203-300x200 Retirement benefits are often subject to property division in a Texas divorce. In some cases, calculating the community interest is straight forward; however, in other cases, it can be somewhat more complex. In a recent case, a former wife challenged a trial court’s handling of the former husband’s retirement benefits after it concluded she had already received all of the benefits to which she was entitled.

The parties had been married 22 years when they divorced. The wife was awarded 50% of the husband’s Civil Service Retirement Benefits accrued as of the date of the decree’s entry. The trial court signed a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (“QDRO”) authorizing payment of an interest in the husband’s monthly annuity payments to the wife and stating that she was entitled to a survivor annuity.

Trial Court Enters Original QDRO

The parties began receiving the monthly annuity payments pursuant to the QDRO after the husband retired at the end of 2011. In March 2016, the husband moved to vacate the QDRO, arguing the wife was not entitled to a survivor’s benefit under the decree but a premium was being deducted from his monthly benefit. He asked the court to amend the QDRO to match the property division in the divorce decree.

Death of a Party During a Texas Divorce Case

Published on: January 25, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

“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 marriage can end through either death or a court’s decree. If a party dies before judgment is rendered in a divorce case, the divorce case abates. In a recent case, a husband challenged a divorce when the decree was signed after the death of the wife.

The wife filed for divorce in October 2018, alleging insupportability, abandonment, and cruel treatment. In his counterpetition, the husband alleged insupportability, cruel treatment, and adultery.

Final Trial

At the trial on September 17, 2019, the court informed the attorneys that it needed time to make its rulings regarding the property. The court said it would email the parties with the decision. The proceedings resumed after a break on the record and the court pronounced the parties divorced and said the entry of the final decree would be ministerial.

Texas Mediated Settlement Agreement Upheld Despite Husband’s Failure to Disclose Assets

Published on: January 17, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

Insurance agent checking policy documents in office.

When parties to a Texas divorce case enter into a mediated settlement agreement (“MSA”) that meets the statutory requirements, the MSA is generally binding and the divorce decree must adopt the agreement. An MSA may not be enforceable, however, if it was procured by fraud or other dishonest means.

A wife recently challenged a divorce decree incorporating an MSA that she asserted was procured by fraud. A divorce decree was issued in Dubai and both parties appealed. The wife subsequently petitioned for divorce and to modify the Dubai court orders in Texas. During discovery in the Texas cases, the husband disclosed one bank account.

The parties signed an MSA that gave the wife half of a retirement account in the husband’s name, $94,000 in cash, and the real and personal property and accounts in her own name or possession. The husband received the other half of the retirement account, real property in Florida, and the real and personal property and accounts in his name or possession. The parties also agreed to cease discovery, except as to issues involving the child.

Texas Appeals Court Denies New Trial and Affirms Disproportionate Division in Default Divorce

Published on: January 5, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-545456068-300x184 A court may proceed with a Texas divorce case even if a party does not appear for the trial. In some cases, a party who fails to respond to divorce papers or appear at trial may be entitled to a new trial, but they must meet certain requirements. In a recent case, a husband appealed the denial of a new trial and challenged the property division in a default divorce.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties lived in the husband’s home in Texas after their marriage in Nigeria. The husband bought a home in New Hampshire and moved there in 2017. The wife petitioned for divorce in 2018.

The trial court issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the husband from interfering with the wife’s health insurance, but he informed the insurer they were divorced while the divorce was pending. The wife’s coverage was cancelled. The wife had to pay $7,500 for medical expenses that the insurer had approved before cancellation. The trial court also prohibited the husband from terminating utility services, but the wife alleged he had them disconnected repeatedly.