Texas

Ex-Wife Entitled to 50% of Community Portion of Pension Benefits in Texas Divorce

Published on: March 16, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1132277483-300x200 Property division in a Texas divorce is intended to be final, and a court generally is not allowed to change the division set out in the final decree. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 9.007. The court may, however, issue orders to clarify or enforce the property division set out or incorporated by reference in the decree. Issues related to retirement benefits are often addressed in a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (“QDRO”) for private employees or a Court Order Acceptable for Processing (“COAP”) for employees of the federal government, which may be incorporated into the decree. Courts may therefore correct or clarify a QDRO or COAP to achieve the property division set out in the decree.

An ex-husband recently challenged an order allowing his ex-wife half of his entire monthly federal pension. The husband started working for the federal government in 1989. The parties got married in 2000 and divorced in 2011.

Language in the decree seemed to award the wife half of the community share of the husband’s federal government pension benefits, but another provision seemed to award her half of all of those benefits. The decree stated the “community portion” of the pension benefits would be identified in a COAP. The court rendered the COAP in January 2012, but it indicated the wife was awarded 50% of all of the federal pension benefits.

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.

Credibility and Evidence in Texas Child-Support Modification Proceeding

Published on: February 27, 2022 | by Kelly McClure

iStock-483611874-300x200 A modification of Texas child support requires the parent seeking the modification to show there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances since the current order was rendered. Tex. Fam. Code § 156.401. A change in income may be a material and substantial change. A court’s primary consideration should be the child’s best interest.

A father recently appealed the denial of his petition for modification of child support.

The parties divorced in 2018. The father agreed to pay $2,000 in monthly child support, to provide health insurance, to make monthly payments for a credit card balance that had been used for his business, and to pay the mother $50,000 in $1,500 monthly payments for her community interest in the business.

Texas Court Limits Visitation Due to History of Family Violence

Published on: February 23, 2022 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-839381426-300x200 Texas family law includes a rebuttable presumption that appointing both parents as joint managing conservators is in the child’s best interest. Tex. Fam. Code § 153.131. The presumption can be rebutted upon a finding of a history of family violence. A mother recently challenged a trial court’s order, arguing in part that the court failed to properly apply the presumption.

Paternity Suit Filed

The parents were not married when the child was born, but lived together until the father was deployed a few months later. The father did not move back in when he returned from his deployment.

The Office of the attorney general petitioned to establish the relationship between the father and the child. The father was adjudicated to be the father and was given the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence with a geographic restriction in a temporary order. The mother was given a standard possession order and required to pay child support.

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.

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.

Former Spouse Cannot File New Suit for Division of Property Disposed of in Texas Divorce

Published on: December 22, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-545456068-300x184 A trial court may order a post-divorce division of community property that was not divided or awarded to either spouse in a Texas divorce decree. Tex. Fam. Code § 9.201. The court may not, however, order a post-divorce division of property that was already divided in the divorce. The legal doctrine of res judicata prevents a party from re-litigating issues such as categorization of assets or improper division in a new case. Parties must instead address such issues through direct appeals. In a recent case, a wife sought a post-divorce division of certain bonuses the husband received after the divorce.

The parties married in 2014, and the wife petitioned for divorce the next year. The husband included several bonuses in his asset inventory. He listed a $0 value for the bonuses that would only be payable after the divorce if he remained employed on the designated date. He testified they had no value because they were conditional on future events.

The wife argued the future bonuses were deferred compensation for work performed during the marriage and estimated their value at more than $4 million.

Texas Contractual Alimony Claim Barred by Contract Statute of Limitations

Published on: July 11, 2021 | by McClure Law Group

iStock-1183385986-scaled Texas divorce cases can involve multiple areas of law. Contract law applies to pre-marital and post-marital agreements. Contract law may also apply to agreements the parties enter into as part of a divorce. In a recent case, a portion of a wife’s claims for contractual alimony was barred by the contract statute of limitations.

When the parties divorced in 2012, they entered into a written agreement. Their divorce decree included a provision for “Contractual Alimony,” with the parties agreeing that the husband would pay the wife $4,000 per month, payable on the first of the month with a five-day grace period before the payment would be considered late. The contractual alimony was to be paid from June 2013 to May 2015. The decree further stated that the wife could accelerate the payments if the husband defaulted and failed to cure within 30 days of receiving notice of intent to accelerate.

Wife Moves to Enforce Contractual Alimony

The wife moved to enforce the alimony requirements on March 26, 2019. She alleged the husband had failed to make the payments starting in December 2013. She asked the court to order him to pay the past due payments, interest, and fees and costs.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Finding of Informal Marriage

Published on: June 20, 2021 | by Francesca Blackard

iStock-1270267953 Texas is one of the few states that still recognizes “informal marriage,” also sometimes known as “common law marriage.” A party who petitions for divorce from an informal marriage often must prove the existence of the informal marriage in the first place. To prove there was an informal marriage, the party must show the couple had an agreement to be married, subsequently lived as spouses together in Texas, and represented themselves as married. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 2.401. Furthermore, all of these elements must occur at the same time. Evidence of an informal marriage may include evidence the parties addressed each other as spouses, conducted themselves as married people, or lived together. Evidence that the parties lived together and represented themselves as married is not alone sufficient to establish the existence of an agreement to be married.

In a recent case, an alleged husband challenged the court’s finding of the existence of an informal marriage. The parties moved to Texas from Colorado with the alleged wife’s two children in 1985. They separated in early 2012. In 2015, the alleged wife filed a trespass to try title suit, claiming joint ownership in real property due to an informal marriage. That lawsuit was consolidated with her subsequent divorce action.

The trial court ultimately found the parties had been in an informal marriage. The court granted a divorce and divided their property. The husband appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence to support the existence of an informal marriage.

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.