Articles Posted in Evidence

Both the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Texas Constitution prohibit the state from depriving a person of a liberty interest without due process of law.  Case law has established that parental rights are fundamental liberty interests.  Due process generally requires that a person be given a meaningful opportunity to be heard.  A mother recently appealed her divorce decree, arguing she was deprived of her due process when the court accepted evidence after trial but before entering the final decree.

According to the appeals court, the child was born in March 2020 and the father filed for divorce the following August. In its ruling, the trial court named the parties joint managing conservators and awarded the father the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence within two counties. The final decree divided the marital estate, awarding the father $104,738.93 and the mother $69,825.95 from the sale of the home.

Due Process Claims

The mother appealed, arguing the trial court violated her due process rights by accepting certain evidence after the trial.

Continue Reading ›

During its most recent session, Texas lawmakers adopted and passed several amendments and updates to the Texas Family Code, which were then formally signed into law by the Governor.

These revisions and additions to the Texas Family Code impact numerous areas of family law, including but not limited to: (1) suits for the dissolution of marriage; (2) suits affecting the parent-child relationship; (3) protective orders; and (4) discovery in cases filed under the Texas Family Code.

Ranging from modifications to elements necessary to prove a claim, clarifications to existing codified law, and the removal of automatically triggered disclosure requirements, family law practitioners throughout the State of Texas should familiarize themselves with these changes and how such changes impact their practice.

In a Texas divorce, the trial court must divide the estate in a just and right manner, but the division does not have to be equal.  Property possessed by either party during or on dissolution of the marriage is presumed to be community property.  To rebut the presumption, a party must generally trace the property back to separate property.  Without tracing, a party’s testimony they purchased the property with separate funds will generally not be sufficient to rebut the presumption. However, a presumption of separate property arises if a deed includes a separate property recital stating the property is transferred as separate property.  If a spouse is party to a transaction, they may not contradict the deed’s express recitals with parol or extrinsic evidence without evidence of fraud, accident or mistake.  If a spouse is not party to the transaction, however, they may use parol evidence to contradict the recitals.

A husband recently challenged the characterization of property in his divorce.

Both parties requested a disproportionate share of the community estate. The husband also requested reimbursement based on alleged waste and actual fraud by the wife.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1214358087-300x169Although testimony can be important evidence in a Texas divorce, documentary evidence is needed for some claims.  A wife recently challenged a number of issues in her divorce based on insufficiency of evidence.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties acquired several rental properties during their marriage.  The husband petitioned for divorce in July 2020.  The trial was originally scheduled for October 7, 2020, but the wife moved for a continuance and asked for mediation.

The trial date was reset for April 28, 2021, but the wife moved for another continuance the day before.  The trial was rescheduled for May 6, 2021, and she again requested a continuance. The trial court denied the motion.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1214358087-300x169The division of property in a Texas divorce does not have to be equal, but should be “just and right.” Each party is responsible for providing evidence to show the value of the property so the court can make the division.  A Texas appeals court recently considered what happens when parties do not provide information regarding the marital estate.

Conflicting Testimony Regarding Parties’ Relationship at Trial

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the husband was sixty and the wife was twenty-seven when they met and married.  According to the husband, he met the wife on an online dating site and went to Monterrey, Mexico to meet her in person in October or November 2007.  After spending time with her that night and the next day, the husband came back to the U.S. The wife denied meeting on a dating site and instead said they met at a hotel bar.  They communicated via email and the husband visited the wife in Mexico a few more times.  They married in February 2008 in Monterrey.  The husband testified they did not have sexual relations or go on a honeymoon.  He came back to Texas a few days later and the wife stayed in Mexico.

The husband obtained an attorney to get visas for the wife and her son.  The visas were denied after an immigration interview in 2008.  The husband claimed he had no further relationship or communications with the wife until late 2017 or early 2018 when she contacted him wanting to come to the U.S. He hired an attorney again.  The wife obtained a visa in March 2018 and moved to Texarkana.  There were substantial differences in the parties’ testimony regarding their relationship while they lived together and the reasons the wife moved to Dallas in 2018.

Continue Reading ›

judge-and-gavel-in-courtroom-171096040-583b48533df78c6f6af9f0e3-300x225While 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.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-848796670-300x200In some Texas custody cases, parents may agree to a support order that differs from the child-support guidelines. A Texas appeals court recently considered what evidence was necessary to support a modification when the father’s income had increased significantly since the agreed order.

The trial court issued an agreed order in 2013 following a mediated settlement agreement between the parties.  The parties agreed the father’s child support would be $1,000 per month, because he would pay all of the travel costs when the mother moved to Virginia (which she did shortly after the agreement).

In 2017, the mother sought an increase in child support by filing a modification suit. Since the original agreed order, the father’s income had increased dramatically. The trial court ordered an increased monthly payment, but the appeals court reversed the order and remanded for a new trial, finding insufficient evidence supporting the amount ordered.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1214358087-300x169Texas law presumes that property possessed by a spouse during or on dissolution of the marriage is community property.  Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.  The presumption can only be rebutted by clear-and-convincing evidence the property is separate. In a recent case, a husband challenged the characterization and distribution of property in his divorce.

The parties got married in 2008 and separated in 2018.  The wife moved into her own apartment and filed for divorce in March 2018.

The wife submitted an inventory and appraisement, a copy of her student-loan activity, and a proposed property division.  The husband also submitted an inventory and appraisement, as well as account statements and receipts.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1046559368

Rules and regulations books with official instructions and directions of organization or team. 3d illustration

Sometimes, people served with divorce papers do not respond.  They may be unsure what to do or they may not want to face the realities of divorce.  Failing to respond will not prevent the divorce, however. If a respondent fails to file an answer to a Texas divorce petition, the court may still grant the divorce through a default judgment.  Although the petitioner must submit evidence supporting their material allegations and the property division must still be just and right, the divorce may be granted on terms that are unfavorable to the respondent.

A husband recently appealed a default judgment that granted a divorce on the ground of adultery. The parties married in 2008 and had two children together. They entered into a post-marital agreement in 2018.  Under that agreement, if the wife filed for divorce because of the husband’s adultery, she would get conservatorship of the children without a geographical restriction, spousal maintenance, and certain property in which the husband held a separate property interest. The wife petitioned for divorce the next year and alleged adultery.  The husband did not file an answer.

Default Judgment is Entered

The wife submitted an affidavit to prove up the divorce that incorporated the post-marital agreement by reference.  She asked the court to approve the post-marital agreement as the agreement of the parties. The trial court granted the divorce on the ground of adultery. The husband appealed.

Continue Reading ›

divorce-property-fraudIn some cases, a party to a Texas divorce may agree to a settlement that seemingly has less-than-favorable terms.  For example, a party may agree to their spouse receiving property with a higher monetary value to ensure they receive property that has personal value to them. In a recent case, a husband alleged the wife committed “fraud by nondisclosure” by entering into a Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) without disclosing that the FBI had possession of certain items that were to be awarded to him under that MSA.

Husband is Awarded Certain Items He Believes are in Wife’s Possession

The parties agreed to the MSA, which gave the wife the personal property in her possession with certain exceptions, including a laptop and cell phone.  These items were explicitly given to the husband in the MSA. When the husband learned that the wife did not actually have possession of these items, he moved to set aside the MSA. The husband testified that the wife having those items was “a key factor” in his agreement to the MSA and the wife receiving so much joint property and custody of their child. He said the contents on those devices could have a negative effect on his military career. He had initially believed they were in the wife’s possession, because he had left them at the home and she had pictures and videos from the devices.  He had previously petitioned for those items to be returned to him, and the wife had subsequently asked to keep all of the possessions in the marital home.

Husband Moves to Set Aside MSA – But is Denied

After he signed the MSA, the husband learned the FBI had both devices. He moved to set aside the MSA in May, arguing the wife committed fraud when she failed to disclose that she did not have the devices. The trial court denied the motion, and the husband appealed.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information