Dallas Divorce Lawyer Blog

What if I don’t like how the court divided the property in my divorce? Can I appeal it?

 You can try and appeal the courts division of your property in a divorce settlement but the appeals court will have a certain standard that they will use when reviewing the trial court’s decision. The appellate court is going to review the court’s decision by using an abuse of discretion standard. What this means is that the appellate court will review the case and make sure there was sufficient evidence for the trial court to base its division of property on. Then, based on that evidence, the appellate court will decide if the trial court’s division was reasonable. If the trial court can show that its decision is based on meaningful and firm evidence, then the appellate court will not overrule the trial court’s division of property.

In my divorce, the court did not divide the property equally, is this fair?

Community property does not have to be divided equally in a trial court’s decision. The trial court can consider factors such as; each party’s earning capacity, abilities, education, business opportunities, physical condition, financial condition, age, size of separate estates, and any future need for support that either spouse may have. The court will evaluate these factors, along with the evidence of each case, to determine a fair division of the property.

For example, in O’Carolan v. Hopper, the appeals court did not agree with a trial court’s division of property and allowed for a new property division. The wife, in this case, had a severe brain malformation. In the divorce, the wife was only awarded spousal support, while the husband had a greater income and more business opportunities than she did. The appellate court decided that the division of property that the trial court rendered was “manifestly unfair”. They allowed for the case to be reviewed again because the division of property that the trial court ordered left the wife vulnerable financially.

If any of the factors listed above applies to you, and the court did not consider them when making the property division in your divorce, then you may be able to appeal it. Your attorney will need to be able to point to specific points of evidence that proves that the division is unreasonable and unfair.

How is tax debt treated in the division of property?

            In Cole v. Cole, the appellate court concluded that tax liability should be considered in order to make a fair division of the community estate. The case of Munai v. Munai is an example of how the court handled $49,000 of debt to the IRS. The husband and wife had been separated for fifteen years when the divorce was finally brought before the court. The trial court awarded the husband all the property that he had acquired in those fifteen years and that he was liable for the $49,000 tax debt. The wife was only given $1,000 from the husband and argued that she should have received more of a share in the husband’s property, even though they had been separated for fifteen years. The wife argued that the trial court should not have considered the tax liability when they divided the community property. However, the court determined that the trial court was correct by doing this because the husband was in the best position to pay the tax liability.

The appellate court concluded that it was reasonable for the trial court to award each party their own assets and debts that they had acquired separately in their fifteen-year separation. Because of the conclusion in Cole v. Cole, tax liability will be considered when making a division of the community estate.

When someone decides to become a lawyer he or she must go through a rigorous process before becoming certified to practice law. It is required that he or she complete law school, which can take anywhere from to three or four years, and pass an extensive exam. During the course of study, prospective lawyers will learn civil procedure, criminal procedure, evidence, legal writing, and various other courses that will prepare them to sufficiently represent a client in the courtroom. Years of preparation and thousands of hours are spent for a person to prepare to be able to adequately represent another person. With all the criteria that must be met for a lawyer to represent another person in court, it would be unreasonable to expect people, without adequate education, to be successful in representing themselves in a courtroom. But, some people try to represent themselves in the courtroom with no legal assistance. This is what the legal field refers to as “pro se”, the Latin phrase meaning “for oneself”. Unfortunately, in some cases, people do so to no avail and Mr. Lares, in his appeal to the Fourth Court of Appeals Court, Lares v. Flores, found out just how difficult the process can be.

Why did Lares’ attempt to represent himself fail?

When a decision is made on a case a person can attempt to appeal the decision by claiming the original court made an error. When making an appeal there are certain rules of procedure that must be sufficiently followed for the court to consider your appeal. Lares had several issues that he wanted to appeal from the trial court. He claimed the trial court erred by failing to provide him notice of the hearing, denying his motion for continuance, refusing to hold his ex wife, Flores, in contempt, and believing his ex wife’s testimony over his because he was incarcerated at the time. Lares needed to prepare an adequate brief of these issues that followed the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Lawyers are trained to know these rules and expected to follow them when they are submitting a brief to the court. If the brief is not adequate, the court will wave the complaints made and the appeal will not be considered.

The brief filed needs to contain a statement of facts, clear arguments for the issues the person is complaining about, and citations to support these arguments. In Lares’ case, because he was representing himself and did not have legal assistance, he was unaware of these requirements. In the very first year of law school, learning how to correctly use citations is the first technique that a student must learn. Law students are trained to know how to make proper citations to authority and students have a brief, similar to what Lares needed, due in the first year of school to present.

Lares, though, did not make proper citations in his brief and the court did not accept his first brief. The court, though, was gracious and allowed Lares to make a second attempt in his brief but he was still unsuccessful. Even with the court specifying what needed to be done to have a proper brief, he was still unable to submit one with the needed criteria. In the end, Lares was unable to submit a correct brief that followed the guidelines set out in appellate procedure. Lares’ brief was deemed inadequate, and because of this, the court considered his inadequate brief as no brief at all. Lares was unable to have his complaints reviewed and failed at his attempt to have his issues reviewed by the court.

Why should I hire an attorney instead of representing myself?

As we saw with Lares’ situation, a court is not going to go easy on you just because you have decided to represent yourself. The appeals court explained that “even though he was pro se, he was required to comply with all applicable rules of procedure, including the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and he was held to the same standards as a licensed attorney.” The “court is not going to give pro se parties an unfair advantage over persons who have counsel to represent themselves.” Lares did not sufficiently provide in his brief basic skills that are taught in the first year of law school. Had Lares consulted with an attorney, the lawyer would have known what was expected, and his brief would have been prepared correctly. When attempting to represent yourself in a courtroom, you are going to be expected to prepare your case to the same standards as an attorney. A lawyer is trained to spot issues and know how to argue them before a court. By representing yourself, you may not be able to spot certain issues that may be needed to win your case. Hiring an attorney to help with your legal matter will greatly heighten your chances of success rather than trying to attempt the process on your own.

 

Usually, it is in the best interest of a child to live with their parent. This is not always the case though, and there are times that a court may need to terminate the rights of a parent. The court will terminate a parent-child relationship if it finds it to be in the best interest of the child and if the parent committed one or more of the statutory acts set out in Texas Family Code 161.001. Abuse and neglect will not always be the only reasons that a parent’s rights have been terminated. Instead, each case that is brought before the court will be determined on a fact based analysis considered by several factors.

How does the court determine the best interest of the child?

In 1976 the court came up with several factors that determine the best interest of the child in Holley v. Adams, and are now termed the Holley factors. These factors include 1) the desires of the child; 2) the emotional and physical needs of the child now and in the future; 3) the emotional and physical danger to the child now and in the future; 4) the parental abilities of the person seeking custody; 5) the programs available to assist the person seeking custody in promoting the best interest of the child; 6) plans for the child by the person seeking custody; 7) the stability of the home or proposed placement; 8) the acts or omissions of the parent that may indicate the parent-child relationship is not a proper one; and 9) any excuse for the acts or omissions of the parent. Not all of the factors listed above will apply to each case brought before the court. The court will use the factors on a case-by-case basis to decide if termination of the parent’s rights is in the child’s best interest.

How does the court apply the Holley factors?

In the Fifth District Court of Appeals case, In the Interest of F.A.B., the court terminated a mother’s parental rights who had been arrested several times for methamphetamines. The court used both the statutory factors listed out in 161.001 and the Holley factors in making its decision. Below is how the court used several Holley factors to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

The court analyzed Holley factor number one, the desire of the child. The child stated several times the want to live with the foster mother rather than the mother of the child. The child had been taken from the mother and was put with a foster mother when the mother was arrested for meth. The mother followed the court’s orders and the child was given back to her. During the time that the child was back with the mother, the child grieved the separation from the foster mother. The counselor testified that the child had feared being taken from the foster mother. The child’s desires weighed in favor of terminating the mother’s parental rights.

The child had been removed from the mother twice because of her meth use. After her second arrest for meth, the child was again removed from the mother and picked up from a CPS worker from school. The worker stated that the child was very upset that the mother had made such a bad decision. After the second removal, the mother only visited her child one time and did not follow the court order to get the child back. The instability of the visits from the mother, and the negative emotional effects of the mother’s arrests favored termination of the mother’s parental rights under Holley factors two and four.

Holley factor three considers the current and future emotional and physical danger to the child. After the child had been removed from the mother the first time, the court allowed for the child to go back to the mother, so long as a person named J.B. had no contact with the child. But, during this time, the mom started using drugs again, and J.B. had moved in with the mother and the child again. The drug use and J.B. both were considered dangers to the child and both circumstances pushed for termination of the mother’s rights.

Holley factor seven considers the stability of the home or proposed placement. The foster mother, in this case, had planned to adopt the child and had been providing the child with a stable environment. The stability that the child could receive with the foster parent also favored termination of the mother’s rights.

Can a parent’s rights be terminated if they use meth?

In the interest of F.A.B. is an example of a mother’s rights being terminated because of meth. She could not stop using meth and it kept her from being able to provide a stable and emotionally safe environment for her child. All the circumstances of that particular case, when analyzed by the Holley factors, led to the mother losing parental rights of her child. However, as the court has noted, not one of the Holley factors is going to determine the case more than the other. The court will have to analyze each case by using the Holley factors that apply to that particular case to decide if parental termination is in the best interest of the child.

How do I prove that I am in a common law marriage?

Texas is a state that recognizes common law/informal marriages but certain elements must be met to prove that a common law marriage between a man and woman exists. Section 2.4019(a)(2) of the Texas Family Code establishes these elements. If a person wants to prove that an informal marriage existed, he or she must be able to prove each of the following. First, it must be established that both persons have made an agreement to be married. After this agreement has been made, during the time that the informal marriage is alleged, both persons must live together in Texas, as husband and wife. While living together it must also be shown that both persons represented to others in the community that they are husband and wife.

In a Texas First District Court of Appeals case, Miller v. Prince, Miller was unable to establish that she and Prince had a common law marriage because she did not live with Prince during the relevant times of the alleged common law marriage. During the course of the relationship, Miller moved to California and then returned to Texas in 1994. When Miller returned to Texas in 1994, she did not live with Prince and therefore was unable to meet that element needed for a common law marriage to be established. A person must be able to prove all of the listed elements when trying to establish a common law marriage. Because Miller and Prince did not live together at the relevant times the court found there to be no common law marriage. Even if Miller had been able to offer some proof to the other elements of common law marriage, it still would not have been granted because all criteria must be met.

What happens if the person I am alleging a common law marriage with marries someone else?

            The Texas Family Code in Section 2.401(d) explains that if someone is trying to prove an informal marriage neither party can be presently married to an outside third party. If either party is legally married to someone else, courts will not allow for you to establish an informal marriage to a different person.

During the time that Miller had moved back to Texas, a couple of months later, Prince married a different woman. “When a person alleges two marriages, courts will consider the most recent marriage valid, unless a party from a previous marriage can prove the previous marriages’ validity.” In this situation, we know that Miller was unable to establish that the common law marriage was valid because she and Prince did not live together. Therefore, Prince could not be a party in Miller’s alleged common law marriage because he was ceremoniously married to another person.

How long do I have to prove an informal marriage existed?

            A party will have a certain amount of time that they can try and prove a common law marriage once the relationship ends. Before 1995 the law said that parties had one year from when the relationship ended to prove a common law marriage. The law now has changed and it is established in Section 2.401(b) of the Texas Family Code. Parties now have two years to prove an informal marriage. The clock on the two years will begin to run once the parties have separated and stopped living together. If the validity of the common law marriage is not brought before the court within two years, courts will then decide that the parties did not enter into an agreement to be married, and an informal marriage will not be recognized.

In Miller’s case the two parties stopped living together in April 1993. Miller only had one year to allege a common law marriage because the relationship ended before 1995. Had the relationship ended after 1995, Miller would have had two years to allege the common law marriage once they separated and stopped living together. In this case though, no matter which law applies, Miller did not bring her claim until 2011. Miller waited too long to try and establish her common law marriage to Prince and the court held that the statute of limitations barred her claim. Once the relationship ends, either party will have two years to bring their alleged common law marriage before the court.

When you are married, you and your spouse accumulate debts together.  Most likely, those debts are either in one or both of your names.  From a divorce attorney’s perspective, it is always best if the debt is in your name or your spouse’s name and it is associated with an asset that you are receiving.  For instance, if you are awarded the car but there is still a note on the car—as long as the note is in your name alone, awarding you the car and the debt associated with it does not create an issue for your spouse.  But, if the debt is in both of your names then the other spouse either wants you to refinance OR sell the asset.  Reason being, if your spouse is ordered to pay a debt that is in both of your names but fails to do so then it affects your credit and the creditor can still come after you for repayment of that debt.

In some instances, people rely upon indemnification provisions within divorce decrees in order to protect them when a debt is in both parties’ names but only one spouse is ordered to pay the debt.  An indemnification provision looks like this:

“Each party represents and warrants that he or she has not incurred any outstanding debt, obligation, or other liability on which the other party is or may be liable, other than those described in this decree.  Each party agrees and IT IS ORDERED that if any claim, action, or proceeding is hereafter initiated seeking to hold the party not assuming a debt, an obligation, a liability, an act, or an omission of the other party liable for such debt, obligation, liability, act or omission of the other party, that other party will, at his or her sole expense, defend the party not assuming the debt, obligation, liability, act, or omission of the other party against any such claim or demand, whether or not well founded, and will indemnify the party not assuming the debt, obligation, liability, act, or omission of the other party and hold him or her harmless from all damages resulting from the claim or demand.

Damages, as used in this provision, includes any reasonable loss, cost, expense, penalty, and other damage, including without limitation attorney’s fees and other costs and expenses reasonably and necessarily incurred in enforcing this indemnity.

IT IS ORDERED that the indemnifying party will reimburse the indemnified party, on demand, for any payment made by the indemnified party at any time after the entry of the divorce decree to satisfy any judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction or in accordance with a bona fide compromise or settlement of claims, demands, or actions for any damages to which this indemnity relates.

The parties agree and IT IS ORDERED that each party will give the other party prompt written notice of any litigation threatened or instituted against either party that might constitute the basis of a claim for indemnity under this decree.”

When reading a provision like this, it does seem pretty solid.  The key thing to keep in mind is that it is an indemnification from liability, not damages.  The Tenth Court of Appeals addresses this issue in Jason Stubbs v. Julianne Stubbs.  In that case, the husband was awarded business entities and the liability associated with those entities in the divorce.  Shortly after the divorce, the wife was sued by a credit card company for credit given to one of the business entities.  The wife had to hire a debt defense attorney and incurred attorney’s fees as a result.  The wife then sued the husband to enforce the indemnification provision in their divorce decree (identical to the one above). The trial court granted the wife her attorney’s fees that she incurred in the debt defense suit and for the installment payments that the husband failed to pay for the credit card.  The husband appealed.

The Court of Appeals noted that a claim under an indemnification provision is associated with the liability and the liability for the party seeking damages has to be “fixed and certain” before the indemnification provision arises.  Therefore, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision because they stated that the language within the decree stated that the husband would hold the wife harmless for any claim that arose and would indemnify her from all damages that arose from said claim.  In this instance, the wife’s damages were fixed because of the attorney’s fees she had to pay in defending against the debt collection suit.

This gives hope to many people who have been affected by their spouses failing to pay a debt.  There are two obstacles though—the key seems to be that you do have to defend yourself in a debt suit and accrue “fixed damages” before you can sue your spouse under the indemnification provision; the second key is that what you will get from the suit is a judgment.  You have a right to enforce that judgment, but you incur more attorneys’ fees to do so and you incur more attorneys’ fees to sue them.  So, if you know that your spouse has the money to cover all of those damages then you should sue them. If anything, you have a judgment to hang over their head and for a significant amount of money it is worth it.  These are the types of cases that you have to weigh your pros and cons.  If you would like to discuss this further, call today to schedule a consultation.

 

I have answered this question time and time again for people and the answer is always the same—nothing good would come of you representing yourself.  While law school does not prepare us for everything the legal world has to throw our way, it definitely prepares us to analyze legal issues on your behalf.  There are numerous examples out there in the appellate cases as to why you should never represent yourself.  But, most people try to rationalize and say that it is not a big deal and that they will ultimately be okay.   My thought process is if you can pay an attorney to even review the documents you are about to sign that is always better than just outright signing something.  Reason being, when it turns out to be something that you did not ultimately want the likely result will be that you will just have to get over it.

The most recent example of why you should never go this alone is out of a bill of review from the 422nd Judicial District Court of Kaufman County.  The case is entitled Laurie Faye Walker v. Brad Vincent Walker and in that case the wife filed a bill of review in the 422nd Judicial District Court, the same court that signed off on her decree, asking the Court to basically review and reconsider her divorce.  The Court denied her bill of review and the wife subsequently filed an appeal.  The Fifth District Court of Appeals upheld the 422nd Court’s denial of the bill of review for numerous reasons.  A bill of review carries a high burden and you have to exhaust all other remedies before filing it.  Thus, the bill of review has to be your last resort that you seek when you do not have any other remedy and the Court of Appeals found that the wife did have a remedy when she was mailed the decree within a week of it being filed.  At that point, she could have filed an appeal but she did not.  She waited four years later and filed a bill of review.  Also, she stated that she signed the decree out of duress but the Court clearly found that she could not be believed when she was in a different state and her husband was not even around her when she signed.  Finally, she claimed that she did not have notice of the final hearing but the Court found that she had signed off on all of the documents and she did have hearing that those documents were approved by the trial court within a week of being filed.  Therefore, the Court held that this was sufficient notice and based on all of these reasons agreed with the trial court.

Do not let this happen to you—hire an attorney to assist you in your divorce.  You always want to hire someone (no matter what stage you are at in your divorce) as opposed to not hiring and then facing the consequences of representing yourself.

Many parents worry about paying for the children’s medical expenses after divorce. If you have a final decree or custody order there should be provisions that detail how the children’s medical expenses will be split among the parents. Typically, one parent is ordered to maintain or obtain health insurance coverage for the children, the other parent might be ordered to pay all or half of the premium (depending upon the custody and visitation arrangement) and then the parties are ordered to pay 50/50 of the unreimbursed or uninsured medical expenses. Most likely, the parent who receives the bill of the medical expenses is ordered to send the actual bill to the other parent within 30 days of receiving the bill. Then, that parent has 30 days from receipt to reimburse the paying parent for their 50% of the expense. The problem arises in that most parties either do not realize or do not comply with the time limitations in the orders. So, what does that mean? If you have received a medical bill and failed to send it to the other parent within 30 days, does that mean that you have to count your losses on the medical expenses?

The Dallas Fifth District Court of Appeals answered this issue recently on an appeal from a Collin County case in In the Interest of I.O.K., J.C.K., and M.O.K., Children. In that case, the parties were divorced and subsequent to that, the mother filed an enforcement seeking reimbursement of medical expenses on the children’s psychology bills. The father failed to pay. The parties’ agreed decree stated, in part, that the party receiving the medical bill must send “all forms, including explanation of benefits (EOB), receipts, bills, and statements reflecting the uninsured portion of the health-care expenses within 30 days after” the party receives them. The father argued that mother never did this and so he should not have to pay. This is despite the fact that he knew the children were attending sessions with the psychologist and had received the bills in the discovery that the parties completed. The father was even receiving the bills from the insurance company with the EOBs. However, at the final hearing the mother admitted that she never sent the bills directly to father within 30 days of receiving them.

Based upon these facts and the reviewed testimony, the Court of Appeals agreed with father that his obligation to reimburse mother his portion of the unreimbursed medical expenses does not arise until mother complies with the terms of the decree and sends the bills to father within 30 days of receiving them. Mother even admitted this in her testimony. Therefore, the Court of Appeals held that you cannot hold the father responsible for the unreimbursed medical expenses when mother did not comply with her obligation under the decree. Therefore, they reversed the trial court’s ruling and ordered that mother take nothing.

The moral of the story? Always, always read your orders and ensure that you know exactly what is expected of you. You cannot point the finger at the other party for violating the orders if you yourself have not complied. You must send the medical bills in compliance with your orders and only then, if the party fails to do their part, can you proceed forward in an enforcement suit for those unreimbursed medical expenses. If you feel as if you are owed medical expenses and you have complied with the orders, then you need to meet with an attorney regarding filing an enforcement action. Schedule a consult with Guest & Gray today.

The most common adoption that we encounter is that of a stepparent.  In many cases, the stepparent has substituted for years as the child’s biological parent that has been absent from their life.  That is, the stepparent cares for the child, provides for the child, consoles the child, and does anything that a “normal” parent would do for their child.  Thus, it is understandable when so many couples come into our office and want to make it official.

To begin this type of proceeding, the parent who is married to the stepparent would petition the court for the termination and adoption and the stepparent would join in that petition.  The child must have lived with the parties for at least 6 months before you can file.  You must have the biological parent whom you are seeking termination on served.  In many cases, the biological parent wants to voluntarily relinquish their rights.  If this is the case, they would sign an affidavit voluntarily relinquishing their rights and consenting to the stepparent adopting the child.  The affidavit would be filed with the court and then the case would basically proceed without that party.  This is, as you can imagine, the easiest way to accomplish the stepparent adoption.

If the other side is not in agreement, then you must seek an involuntary termination which can be very difficult.  The grounds for an involuntary termination are contained in Texas Family Code Chapter 161 and this is a complete list.  Meaning, if it is not on the list, then it is not grounds for involuntary termination.  So, if you have an order and the other parent is not exercising their ordered visitation or not paying child support as ordered, most likely this will not be enough.  While these are arguably contained in the list, you still have a court order that you could enforce rather than say, “Okay, they are not doing what they should and so their chance is over.”  In fact, many courts would wonder why you would not seek enforcement rather than a termination.  Most courts if presented with this type of situation would give the other parent a chance to have involvement in the child’s life.  Also, as in all family law cases, even if the parent has done one or more of the things on the list, it must still be in the best interest of the child that the court terminates that parent’s rights to the child.

Despite voluntary or involuntary relinquishment, there are additional requirements in these types of cases.  For instance, the Court will appoint an attorney ad litem for the child to ensure that the termination and the adoption are in the best interest of the child.  As well, the Texas Family Code requires that a preadoptive social study be completed.  A court appointed social worker will come into the home of the petitioning couple and will investigate the couple’s background, living arrangements, as well as interview the child.  If the parent on whom you are seeking a termination contests the case, the social worker will also investigate that parent and their home.  Once completed, the social worker will report back to the Court in writing on whether he or she feels that this adoption would be in the best interest of the child.  Also, the stepparent will have to complete the criminal history report—he or she will get a fingerprint card for the purposes of the adoption and will have to send to the Texas Department of Public Safety.  Texas Department of Public Safety will then directly send the criminal history report to the court in which the case is filed.

Contact your family law attorney at Guest & Gray, P.C. to discuss any additional questions you might have regarding your termination and adoption.

As a general rule in Texas, all property that you acquire during marriage is community property.  There are some exceptions in which property can be deemed one spouse’s separate property.  These are pretty basic concepts but the issues arise when property is commingled or wasted by another spouse and how does a court compensate the other spouse for that?  For instance, most people may realize that if you buy a home prior to marriage then that home should be your separate property.  However, if there was still a mortgage on the home and your spouse contributed to the mortgage then the contributing spouse now has a reimbursement claim.  Also, reimbursement arises when one spouse “wastes” or spends money from a community property account.  For example, if the parties have a savings account and one spouse spends money from that account and cannot prove it is for necessary living expenses then the other spouse may be able to recover their portion of the funds.  Equitable reimbursement can be a tricky concept that family lawyers have to deal with because it is not as cut and dry as people think and sometimes, even though the law may seem clear.

The important thing is to know the law and understand whether or not you qualify for an equitable reimbursement claim.   If you are making a claim for reimbursement, then you bear the burden of proving that expenditures were made and that you have a right to be reimbursed for those expenditures.  So the two issues to focus on are (a) either funds of one estate were used to enhance another estate without receiving any benefit (separate property money used to pay off a debt that arose during that marriage; separate money used to put towards the purchase of a community asset) OR (b) the other spouse “wasted” the funds of the community estate.  The latter is proved by stating that the “wasting spouse” has committed constructive fraud—they spent your portion of the estate without your knowledge or consent.  This is not to be confused with actual fraud which requires malice intent.  If you prove this, then your spouse must defend themselves and prove that it was “fair” spending on such things as necessary living expenses.   The spouse defending themselves can always have a claim for an offset which is where they state that they are owed some deduction in the claimant spouse’s total reimbursement because they may have done some other form of reimbursement.  For example, you may have a claim for reimbursement of $50,000.00 but your spouse can claim an offset if they purchased something for you with a portion of those funds (i.e. a car or paid off some debt).

We have several cases involving claims of reimbursement in Kaufman County.  It is a normal occurrence in divorces, especially if people have separate property coming into the marriage or inherit something during the marriage.  If you feel that you are eligible in any way for an equitable reimbursement claim or have questions regarding property division in a divorce in general, please contact Guest & Gray and schedule a consultation.

Getting divorced doesn’t have to be expensive. But if you’ve been through one or looked into getting one, you know that it usually is. Sometimes it’s expensive because attorney’s fees are so high. Other times it’s expensive because the parties involved can’t help but fighting over every little thing. But if you and your spouse can come to an agreement on how to split up your property and/or time with your children, we’ll do our part to keep the attorney’s fees to a minimum.

Guest & Gray, P.C. is now offering flat fees for agreed divorces, and we’re accepting payment plans. Here’s how it works. The base fee for an agreed divorce is $1,200. If you have kids or property the base fee is $1,500. If you have kids and property the base fee is $1,800. The base fee is then paid in three equal one-third installments. For example, if you have kids and property and are working under the $1,800 base fee, your initial payment is $600. Once we have received your initial payment, we’ll draft the start up paperwork like the divorce petition. Once you pay the second installment of $600, we’ll file the petition with the court and get the 60 day waiting period started. When you pay the final $600, we’ll draft the final paperwork and set the case for a final hearing. You can do this on your own timeline as your finances allow. The sooner you’re able to make your installment payments, the sooner your divorce can be finalized. But if you need to delay your payments a bit to keep your finances in order, we can wait.

There may be additional fees if you require additional documents to be drafted so that an interest in a house or a retirement fund can be transferred. But the base fee covers the things every agreed divorce requires: a petition for divorce, a waiver of service (so a process server doesn’t have to serve the other party) and a final decree of divorce. Again, we can do this on your timeline, so the payment plan can proceed at the pace at which you need it to proceed.

We believe a flat fee arrangement for agreed divorces is better for both our firm and the client. On our end it means we don’t have to constantly have to hassle you for money to conclude your case. Come to think of it, that’s why it’s good on your end, too. We don’t have to hassle you for more money. This is what it costs, and you can pay us as you’re able. This type of payment plan allows you to control how fast the divorce concludes.

If you need an Kaufman County agreed divorce and you need to do it on a payment plan, our firm is happy to assist you. Please give us a call at (972) 564-4644 to set up a time to meet with me for a free, 30 minute initial consultation. I’ll be happy to sit down with you to make sure you and your spouse have come to an agreement on all matters that must be dealt with in a divorce so that we can proceed with an agreed divorce from there.