Property Rights

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. . .”

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.

Evidence of Separate Property in Texas Divorce Cases

Published on: November 29, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1214358087-300x169 Texas 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.

Is it Possible to Keep Your 401(k) in Your Divorce?

Published on: November 25, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-654702696-300x200 One asset that many Texans do not consider their spouse to have an interest in is their 401(k) or any other retirement fund that they have been slowly building during the course of their marriage. Having to divide up your retirement funds may throw a wrench into one’s retirement plans, but, where possible, courts often award retirement accounts to the spouse in whose name they are held. Provided the somewhat-ambiguous “just and right” standard is met, Texas divorce courts have wide discretion to divide up individual assets as they see fit. This may involve splitting each asset, such as 401(k), and dividing the funds therein between the spouses. However, more commonly, courts attempt to award whole assets to either party to avoid an overly complicated, and perhaps unnecessary, division of property.

With this in mind, it is important to focus aspects of your case at trial on why the court should award your 401(k) to you. Factors such as your role in contributing to it, your need for future support, the value of assets in your spouse’s control, your and your spouse’s relevant incomes, which spouse is appointed primary conservator of their children (if any), and many others can be useful to craft a compelling case to keep your 401(k) plan (or any other asset).

In addition, you can sometimes increase the likelihood that you keep your 401(k) post-divorce by entering into a settlement agreement with your spouse. In Texas, spouses are free to enter into settlement agreements to resolve one or more aspects of their divorce, such as the division of their community estate. Settlement is an important process in a Texas divorce, because it can often be the best way to ensure that you retain your hard-earned nest egg and any other assets that you consider important.

Texas Appeals Court Enforces Property Distribution Years After Default Divorce

Published on: November 23, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

images Failing to respond to a Texas divorce petition can result in a default judgment with an unfavorable property division. What happens, though, if the spouse who received the default judgment fails to take action to enforce the property division for several years? A Texas appeals court recently considered a case involving that issue.

Wife Obtains Default Judgment

The husband bought a home before he met the wife. They refinanced it jointly twice during the marriage. The wife subsequently filed for divorce and obtained a default divorce decree in February 2011. The decree listed the home as community property and stated that the wife owned it alone as separate property and that the court divested “any interest, title, and claim the Husband may have to [it].” The court further ordered the husband to sign any deeds necessary to transfer the property to her. There was a remaining principal of $43,399.14 according to the bank statement for the next month.

The husband testified he had not been served and only found out about the divorce case and default divorce later that year. The wife moved out about four months after the divorce. She stated the husband did not want her to live there and tried to “kick [her] out in a very aggressive way. . .” She claimed “[t]here was a lot of violence. . .” The husband testified the wife would yell at him that the house was hers and she was going to take it from him. He then went to court to see the divorce decree and learned it awarded the house to the wife. He said he could not afford an attorney at the time.

Texas Divorce Court Must Compel Arbitration of Dispute Regarding Buyout Provision of Company Agreement

Published on: November 3, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-1287431987 A family business can complicate the property division in a Texas divorce. A recent case considered whether a husband could compel arbitration to enforce a buyout provision in a company agreement during the divorce proceeding.

The parties formed a limited-liability company together during the marriage, with each owning a 50% membership interest. The husband subsequently petitioned for divorce and the wife filed a counterpetition. Both attached the standing order required by the Travis County District Clerk to protect the parties and preserve their property while the case is pending. The standing order applies to all divorce suits filed in Travis County (and many other counties have similar standing orders, such as Dallas, Collin, Denton, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties) and prohibits parties from taking certain actions that would harm or reduce the value of the property and from selling or otherwise alienating property belonging to either party.

Wife Seeks to Compel Arbitration on Business Disputes

The husband sought injunctive relief and temporary orders to address disputes relating to operation of the business. The wife asked for those disputes to be resolved according to the company agreement, which required any court proceeding brought by one owner against the other be submitted to mediation first and then to binding arbitration if not resolved. The parties were required to go to mediation and arbitration and the arbitrator entered an award regarding management and control of the business. The wife moved to enforce the arbitration award and the court entered temporary orders in accordance with that award.

Ex-husband Denied Share of Ex-Wife’s Military Retirement Years After Texas Divorce

Published on: October 7, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-543681178 Many assets divided in a Texas divorce are distributed during or soon after the divorce, but some assets, such as retirement benefits, may not be distributed for many years. Issues involving retirement benefits may continue or arise several years after the divorce is final. A Texas appeals court recently decided a dispute involving retirement benefits between parties who divorced in 2008.

Both parties were in the military when they divorced. The stipulated final divorce decree divided the husband’s retirement benefits equally between them and awarded the wife 100% of her “retirement plan” or other benefits resulting from her employment.

Husband Argues He Agreed to Divorce Decree While Under Duress

The wife petitioned for a clarification of the division of the husband’s military retirement in 2017. The husband argued he agreed to the property division under duress because the wife had threatened to tell his superiors he was having an affair if he did not agree. He claimed he only agreed because he was concerned he would face a court martial or negative effects on his chances of promotion if she reported him.

Texas Divorce Court Cannot Divide Property Owned by Business Entity

Published on: July 18, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1215119911 A trial court must divide community property in a “just and right” manner in a Texas divorce. The court must properly characterize the property before it in order to achieve a just and right division. Characterization can be complex when the parties have significant assets acquired through various means. It can get even more complicated when the parties have ownership interests in business entities that also own property.

A husband recently appealed the property division in his divorce decree, arguing the court had improperly awarded him property owned by business entities as his separate property. The parties got married in 1993. They lived in Connecticut, but the wife moved to Texas in 2018 for a job. The husband remained in Connecticut where his construction businesses were located. He told the wife, however, that he would move to Texas in a year to a year and a half, but ultimately did not do so.

Wife Files for Divorce

The wife petitioned for divorce in 2019. The husband’s father and his company filed suit against three of the husband’s businesses a few days before the divorce trial. The lawsuit alleged the husband’s companies owed his father’s company $770,644 for equipment rental.

Military Disability Cannot Be Divided by Texas Divorce Court

Published on: May 31, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-543681178 Under federal law, a court may not treat military disability benefits as community property for purposes of property distribution in a Texas divorce case. A husband recently challenged the property distribution in his divorce decree, arguing the court had improperly divided a portion of his military disability benefits.

Trial Court Divides Husband’s Military Retirement Benefits

The wife petitioned for divorce and sought a majority of the community assets. The court granted the divorce on grounds of insupportability and adultery. The decree gave the wife 55% of the husband’s disposable military retired pay, attorney’s fees, and conditional appellate attorney’s fees. The husband appealed.

The husband contended the 55% of his disposable military retired pay awarded to the wife erroneously included disability payments. The wife, however, argued the award did not include disability benefits and the decree had specifically awarded him his “VA Disability and Social Security Disability benefits” as separate property.

Texas Appeals Court Finds Property Was Separate Despite Use of Community Funds

Published on: April 25, 2021 | by Kelly McClure

images In a Texas divorce case, property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be community property. A spouse claiming property is their separate property must show that it is separate by clear and convincing evidence. Separate property is generally property that is owned before the marriage, property that the spouse acquired as a gift or inheritance, or property recovered as damages in a personal injury case. Community property is generally property acquired after the marriage that is not characterized as separate property.

In a recent case, a wife challenged the court’s characterization of certain property as the husband’s separate property. The wife filed for divorce. The parties agreed they had married in India in 1976, but disagreed on the date they stopped living together as husband and wife.

Husband and Wife Enter into Settlement – But Leave One Issue for Trial

The case went to trial, but, before trial, the parties entered into a Mediated Settlement Agreement (“MSA”). In the MSA, the parties agreed their community property located in India would be divided by Indian courts. The parties agreed to the characterization and division of everything except two pieces of land in India, referred to as the “Fifteen-Cent” property and the “One-and-a-half-Acres” property. The MSA stated they would “defer to characterization and confirmation of separate property” of those two parcels to the trial court.