Property

Husband’s Reimbursement Claim For High Dollar Assets Taken After Separation by Wife Denied

Published on: May 14, 2025 | by McClure Law Group

Reimbursement is an equitable right arises in a Texas divorce when the property of one marital estate is used to the benefit of another marital estate, resulting in unjust enrichment to the benefited estate if not repaid. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402. A spouse may pursue a reimbursement claim, for example, if community property funds are used to pay the debt for or make improvements to the other spouse’s separate property. The court must apply equitable principles to determine if it will recognize a claim for reimbursement, considering the relative circumstances of both parties and, if the court determines the reimbursement claim is appropriate, it must order a just and right division of the claim for reimbursement, with regard for the rights of the parties and children. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.007. The spouse seeking reimbursement has the burden of proving that the property of one marital estate was used by one or both spouses to benefit another marital estate, the value of that benefit, and that the benefited estate will be unjustly enriched if reimbursement is not required. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b). The trial court has broad discretion in determining reimbursement claims.

In a recent case, a former husband appealed the divorce decree that did not award him reimbursement. The wife petitioned for divorce in 2022, after nearly 50 years of marriage. In his counterpetition, the husband made a claim for reimbursement, but the court did not award him reimbursement in the final divorce decree.

The Husband’s Appeal

The husband appealed, arguing the trial court did not properly apply the law regarding reimbursement of the community estate. The judge stated, “whatever she took with her [in 2016] the marriage was still ongoing . . . . I cannot go back in time and fix that.” The husband argued the court misstated the law.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Award of Husband’s Retirement Despite Premarital Agreement Terms

Published on: May 8, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

Spouses can agree to change their rights and obligations with regard to property by signing a Texas pre-marital agreement. Premarital agreements, also known as prenuptial agreements, are often used in circumstances involving a high net worth or where one spouse enters the marriage with significantly more assets than the other. While prenuptial agreements can be valuable tools to protect a spouse’s assets, they can also be contentious in the event of a divorce.

A husband recently challenged the property division in his divorce decree, arguing the trial court had not followed the premarital agreement in dividing the parties’ property.

Before the marriage, the parties executed a premarital agreement the husband bought online.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Discharge of Receiver Years After Final Divorce Decree

Published on: February 28, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

The court in a Texas divorce case may appoint a receiver to protect and preserve the property of the parties. TEX. FAM. CODE § 6.502(a)(5). The receiver only has the powers authorized by the court. The receiver’s role is to receive and preserve the property for all interested parties’ benefit. The receiver must exercise ordinary care in performing their duties. Receivers may be appropriate in high net worth divorces with complex assets or where there are concerns a party may hide or misuse assets. In a recent case, a former husband appealed a trial court order terminating receivership, discharging the receiver, and granting turnover relief to the wife.

Appointment of Receiver

The husband petitioned for divorce in 2009. The court appointed a receiver in 2011 and ordered that he was to take necessary actions to secure payments and manage, control and dispose of the husband’s property. He was also authorized to pay the husband’s living expenses, legal fees and expenses, and court-ordered obligations.

The receiver was subsequently ordered to take possession and control of certain of the husband’s assets, including property in his bankruptcy estate and any exempt retirement accounts. The court instructed the receiver to pay the husband’s living expenses of $5,000 per month, obligations to the wife and minor children, court-ordered obligations to third parties, and up to $1,500 in unexpected expenses of either party, but not more than $6,000 in any four-month period without a court order.

Court Erred in Valuation of Large Pension in Texas Divorce

Published on: February 7, 2025 | by Francesca Blackard

Pensions and retirement accounts can complicate property division, especially in a high net worth Texas divorce. Retirement accounts often include both separate and community property. In a recent case, a former husband challenged the court’s valuation of the wife’s pension and the resulting property division.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties had been married nearly 30 years when the wife left and filed for divorce. The trial court found the husband had committed fraud on the community and awarded the wife a disproportionate division of the community estate.

The trial court found the assets of the reconstituted community estate were worth more than $1.8 million. The court also found the community had debts totaling more than $87,000. The court allocated a net estate of over $920,000, or 50.96% of the reconstituted community estate, to the wife and over $888,000, or 49.04%, to the husband.

Texas Court Denies Petition to Enforce Provisions of 1993 Divorce Decree in High Net Worth Divorce

Published on: January 6, 2025 | by Kelly McClure

The conflict in a Texas divorce does not always end when the divorce is finalized, especially a high net worth divorce or one that involves complex assets. A Texas appeals court recently considered an appeal of a denial of a petition to enforce certain property division provisions from a divorce decree from 1993. The ex-husband was deceased when the petition for enforcement was filed, so his widow, as heir to the property, was the real party in interest in the proceedings.

Divorce Decree

The divorce decree incorporated and adopted a “Property Statement and Settlement,” an agreement between the ex-husband and ex-wife addressing the division of assets and liabilities. The decree awarded the ex-husband a particular property in Williamson Count as his sole and separate property. It provided that the ex-wife was divested of any right and title in the homestead. The ex-husband would be solely responsible for all liabilities and benefits associated with the dwelling. The decree further provided that if the husband failed to make the monthly mortgage payments, the house and/or property would be sold. “In the event of sale of said dwelling and/or acreage,” the wife would be entitled to ½ of the net profit. The ex-wife was not to be held liable for any mortgage payments, taxes, or other expenses related to the property.

The decree awarded the ex-wife 100% of the proceeds from the sale of a different property, as well as all benefits associated with it. The decree also awarded her a vehicle, jewelry, a savings account, and a checking account. All debt was awarded to the ex-husband.

Texas Appeals Court Finds Wife Failed to Meet Purchase Option Requirements on Marital Residence in Divorce Decree

Published on: December 21, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

In a property division of a complex estate in a Texas divorce, one party may be given the option to purchase the other spouse’s interest in real property or a business. The divorce decree may include terms regarding the purchase option, including deadlines, contingencies, and requirements that the other spouse cooperate by signing documents. In a recent case, a former wife sought a bill of review after she did not complete the purchase of the marital residence from the former husband by the deadline stated in the decree.

The trial court signed a Final Decree of Divorce Nunc Pro Tunc in March 2020. Both parties “approved and consented to” the form and substance of the decree. The decree gave the wife the right to purchase the marital residence, which was in the husband’s name. However, if she failed to purchase the property and close by September 1, 2020, she would waive any interest in the property and it would remain the husband’s sole and separate property.

On August 27, 2020, she sent a letter and real estate contract with a September 24 closing date to the husband. He did not respond and the wife failed to buy the property and close by the deadline.

Husband’s Inherited Home Confirmed as Separate Property Not Subject to Division in Divorce

Published on: October 27, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

The court in a Texas divorce case must divide the parties’ estate in a just and right manner. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001. Complex estates may include both community and separate property, acquired from various sources. The court can only divide community property, which is any property acquired by a spouse during the marriage except separate property. Separate property includes property owned by the spouse before the marriage and property acquired by a spouse during the marriage through gift, devise, or descent. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001(2). There is a presumption property either spouse possesses during or on dissolution of the marriage is community property and a spouse claiming property is separate has the burden of proof to a clear and convincing standard. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003.

In a recent case, a former wife appealed the court’s property division in the final divorce decree. The parties got married in 1999 and had one child. The husband petitioned for divorce in 2017. He asked the court to confirm two pieces of real property were his separate property. The wife sought reimbursement to and reconstitution of the community estate and spousal maintenance. The court filed the final divorce decree in January 2024 and the wife appealed.

Separate Property

On appeal, the wife challenged the trial court’s characterization of the “69^th Street property” as the husband’s separate property. She argued the husband had not presented sufficient evidence to support his testimony that he had inherited it.

Reconstitution of Community Estate Due to Waste or Fraud in Texas Divorce

Published on: September 30, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

A court dividing property in a Texas divorce may consider a number of factors, including fraud or waste of community assets by a party. A spouse may commit constructive fraud or waste by unfairly depriving the other spouse of the benefit of community assets. There is a presumption of constructive fraud when a spouse disposes of the other’s interest in community property without their knowledge or consent. A former husband recently challenged a property division after the court found he had committed fraud and waste on the community estate.

The parties married in February 2011 and the wife petitioned for divorce in July 2018. Both parties alleged constructive fraud and wasting of community assets by the other and sought reconstitution and a disproportionate share of the community estate.

The court granted divorce and ultimately confirmed $46,000 in an IRA as the husband’s separate property. The court found the husband committed fraud on the community estate and reconstituted the community estate. Included in the reconstitution was $71,483.33 for depletion of an IRA, $81,321.98 for dissolution of the husband’s interest in a limited liability company, and $17,000 for unpaid medical expenses for the children. The court also awarded the wife a disproportionate share of the community estate.

Property Division Pursuant to Texas Premarital Agreement Turns on Interpretation of “Their”

Published on: August 28, 2024 | by Kelly McClure

Property’s characterization as either separate or community property in a Texas divorce is generally determined by its character at inception. The Texas Family Code includes a presumption that property either spouse possesses during or on dissolution is community property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003(a). The Code defines “community property” as the property acquired during the marriage by either spouse, except separate property. § 3.002. Personal income and income produced by separate property is generally community property. Spouses may, however, enter contracts changing their rights and obligations with regard to property. Although premarital agreements are contracts and generally interpretated according to the rules of contract interpretation, they are narrowly construed in favor of the community estate. A former husband recently appealed the property division in his divorce, argued the court had failed to apply the terms of the premarital agreement.

Premarital Agreement

The parties had signed a premarital agreement two days before their wedding. The husband drafted the agreement based on a form from the internet. The agreement was partially typed and partially handwritten. The agreement included a Separate Property Provision that provided that the separate property each party brought to the marriage would stay their separate property. It also included an Acquired Property Provision that provided, “All property acquired by each during the marriage shall be deemed [th]eir property.” The agreement also stated that the husband’s 401(k), along with “income profits, Deferred Retirement Option (D.R.O.P.) or any benefits of any kind accruing from it” would remain his separate property. The agreement further provided that the wife’s “personal income or retirement will remain her separate property.”

The dispute was over the meaning of the Acquired Property Provision, specifically related to the marital home and a vehicle. The husband bought the house four years into the marriage with funds received from the sale of a house in Hurst, Texas, he had purchased with his separate property in 2006. The parties had lived in the home in Hurst from 2006 until 2014. The wife said she paid for improvements to both.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms Equal Property Division Despite Fraud Allegations

Published on: August 20, 2024 | by Francesca Blackard

A trial court in a Texas divorce must divide the community estate in a just and right manner. The court has broad discretion in determining what is just and right, and, when there is a reasonable basis for doing so, the court may order a disproportionate division. The court may consider a party’s claims for waste or fraudulent transfer of community property in its property division. Waste, or constructive fraud, occurs when one spouse wrongfully depletes the community estate without the knowledge or consent of the other spouse. Actual fraud occurs when a spouse transfers community property or uses community funds for the primary purpose of depriving the other spouse of their use and enjoyment. A reimbursement claim arises when the assets of one estate are used for the benefit of another estate without benefit to the first, such as community funds being used to pay for repairs to one spouse’s separate property. A former wife recently appealed the property division in her divorce, arguing the court abused its discretion by not awarding her a disproportionate share due to her fraud and reimbursement claims.

Divorce Proceedings

According to the appeals court, the parties each owned property when they married and acquired property together during the marriage. The husband granted a gift deed to a half interest in his separate property, identified by the court as “Bayou Shore.” The wife’s separate property was sold to her brother to resolve a community debt during the marriage.

Both parties alleged fraud and made claims for reimbursement and waste.