Articles Tagged with father

iStock-1132277483In determining the Texas child-support obligation of a parent, the court may consider whether that parent is intentionally unemployed or underemployed.  If the court finds the parent is intentionally unemployed or underemployed, it may apply the support guidelines to that parent’s earning potential, rather than to their actual earnings.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 154.066.  The court does not have to find the parent was attempting to avoid child support to find intentional unemployment or underemployment.

In a recent case, a father challenged the denial of his request for modification of his child-support obligation following a change in jobs that resulted in a significant salary reduction.  When the parties divorced in 2015, the trial court appointed the parents joint managing conservators and gave the mother the exclusive right to determine the children’s primary residence. The father was ordered to pay $1,600 in monthly child support and to maintain insurance for the children.

Mother and Father File Competing Modification Suits

The mother petitioned to modify the medical-support provision to give her the obligation to maintain medical insurance in 2019.  The father counter-petitioned to reduce his monthly child support based on a change in his salary.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-483611874The trial court has some discretion in determining the modified amount of child support when it has determined that a Texas child support order should be modified. Tex. Fam. Code § 154.125 provides a schedule of percentages that are presumptively applied when the parent’s net monthly resources do not exceed a specified amount. The trial court, however,  may consider the listed factors or “any other reason” to determine the application of those amounts is not in the best interest of the child.  Tex. Fam. Code § 154.123. There must be evidence of the child’s “proven needs” in the record for the court to deviate upwards from the guidelines. Tex. Fam. Code § 154.126.

A father recently challenged a modification to his child support obligation, arguing the trial court improperly deviated from the presumptive amount. According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties’ 2017 divorce decree obligated the father to pay $1,710 in child support each month for one child (i.e., max child support at the time). In 2018, he petitioned to modify the amount of child support, claiming his income had decreased.

Father Seeks Reduction in Child Support

The father lived in California and worked as a vice president, selling software testing. His base salary was $80,000, but he also earned commissions and a significant bonus (up to 50% of his base salary). The mother had been a homemaker, but had just begun providing catering services at the time of the hearing.  She had earned approximately $1,400 for the one event she had catered at the time of trial.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-1033856542Texas family law presumes a man is the father of a child in certain circumstances, including when he is married to the child’s mother at the time of the birth or when he continuously resides with the child for the first two years of the child’s life and holds himself out to others as the child’s father. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.204.  A Texas trial court must generally order genetic testing to determine parentage if one of the parties requests it, but that is not the case if there is a presumed father. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.502. When there is a presumed father, the court may deny the request for genetic testing if the conduct of the requesting party estops them from denying parentage and it would be inequitable to disprove the presumed father’s parentage.  In deciding whether to deny a request for genetic testing, the court must consider the child’s best interests, including certain enumerated factors. Tex. Fam. Code § 160.608

A man recently challenged a court’s order for genetic testing and subsequent adjudication that he was not the child’s father. The child was born while the appellant was in a relationship with the child’s mother.  According to the appeals court’s opinion, the appellant was aware he was not the child’s biological father but agreed to be listed as the father on the birth certificate.  The appellant and the mother broke up, but the appellant continued to see the child nearly every day.  The mother subsequently denied him access to the child after they were unable to reach a child-support agreement.

Man Petitions to Adjudicate Paternity

The appellant petitioned to be named a joint managing conservator of the child in 2016.  The trial court ordered genetic testing. When the results showed the appellant was not the child’s biological father, the trial court adjudicated him not to be the child’s father.  The appellant then appealed and asked the appeals court to name him joint managing conservator.

Continue Reading ›

5thingsdivorcecourt_headerA court should consider a number of factors in deciding a Texas custody case.  Even when the court determines the parents should be joint managing conservators, the court does not have to award equal periods of possession and access to the child to each parent. Tex. Fam. Code § 153.135.  Under Texas law, there is a rebuttable presumption that the standard possession order serves the child’s best interests.  Tex. Fam. Code § 153.252.  A father recently challenged the divorce decree giving the mother the right to designate the child’s primary residence and awarding him the standard possession order.

Trial Court Initially Awards Father Primary Custody

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the parties’ child was born about three months after they married in 2014.  The parties separated in 2016 and the mother petitioned for divorce in March 2017. The court signed temporary order giving the father the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence in Travis County.

At the custody hearing, there was evidence the mother had sustained a serious brain injury the previous year.  There was significant testimony about her mental health before and after the separation and about how her injury affected her ability to take care of the child.

Continue Reading ›

BSgavelx1200-768x432-1The trial court in a Texas family law case has only a limited ability to change its judgment once its plenary power expires.  Generally, plenary power lasts for thirty days from the date the final judgment is signed, but it may be extended if the court overrules certain motions or modifies the judgment while it still has plenary power.

In a recent case, a mother challenged the court’s authority to reform the judgment.  According to the appeals court’s opinion, she had petitioned for the adjudication of the parentage of her child.  Both the mother and the alleged father sought an order adjudicating him to be the child’s father.

The parties reached a partial agreement and went to trial on the remaining issues.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-839381426

There is a strong presumption in Texas family law that it is in the child’s best interest for a parent to be awarded custody over a non-parent. In a recent case, a father appealed a judgment naming him joint managing conservator with the child’s maternal grandmother. A central issue in the case was the father’s argument that he should have been appointed the child’s sole managing conservator based upon the parental presumption.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-483611874If a parent in a Texas child-support case is intentionally unemployed or underemployed resulting in an income significantly less than what they could earn, the court may calculate child support based on their earning potential. Tex. Fam. Code § 154.066(a).  The other parent has the burden of showing that the parent is intentionally unemployed or underemployed.

A father recently challenged a trial court’s finding that he was intentionally unemployed or underemployed and the child-support obligation based upon that finding.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information