Articles Posted in Divorce

by

A trial court has plenary jurisdiction (complete control) over a case for 30 days after the judge signs the final judgment in a divorce decree. During those 30 days, one of the parties may file a motion for a new trial or a motion to modify, correct, or reform a judgment. That is, either party can file a motion to have the divorce re-tried before a court or if a party is not satisfied with the final judgment given by the court, then the party can file to have it changed. But, each party only has 30 days from when the judge signs the final divorce decree to do so. Rule 329b(c) requires that these motions be in writing and signed by the court for them to be enforceable. Parties cannot give their consent to allow the court to have more control than what it specified in the rule.

Take, for example, the Dallas Fifth District Court of Appeals Case, In the Interest of M.A.C. and M.T.C. Here a Final Decree of Divorce was rendered on August 28, 2013. The Mother filed motions for a new trial and a motion to modify, reform, and correct the judgment on September 6, 2013, well within the 30 days set out in the rule, but the record did not contain a written and signed order from the trial court on either motion. Because there was no written and signed order, both motions were overruled by law on November 11, 2013. But, the record in the case contained a “First Amended Decree of Divorce” signed on January 22, 2014. Thus, the father here filed a motion for a new trial January 27, 2014 were he argued that the trial court’s plenary power had already expired when the First Amended Decree was signed.

The two motions the mother filed were overruled by law November 11, 2013, seventy-five days after the final divorce decree was signed. When she filed the motions, the court retained control over the matter for 30 days after the law overruled the motions. Therefore, the court here had control over this case until December 11, 2013, one hundred and five days after the Final Divorce Decree judgment was signed. The First Amended Decree signed on January 22, 2014 was void because the court no longer had jurisdiction or plenary power over the matter.

Continue Reading

by

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.

Continue Reading

by

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.

by

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.

by

If you have a current pending divorce or suit affecting the parent-child relationship then you most likely have temporary orders in place.  If not, in most family law cases you do want to ensure that you have temporary orders granted by the Court so that you know what you should and should not be doing while the case is pending.  That is, temporary orders set the status quo of your case and instruct the parties as to their rights and duties with respect to their children, property, debts, and other issues in the case.  For instance, you may have been granted exclusive use of the marital residence, your vehicle, and primary possession of the children.  These are all essential things to establish in a case without delay, unless you and the other party are working amicably towards a final resolution.

Enforcement of Violated Temporary Orders

Once the Court has granted the temporary orders, they are enforceable against both parties.  If any portion of those orders is violated by either party, there are options.   The other party may have been ordered to pay child support and they may not be doing that and you may need that support in order to survive.  Or, the other party may have been ordered to participate in counseling or drug testing and they not be doing so.  It might even be that the other party will not stay away from the property or give you the car you were awarded temporarily.  All of these issues are concerning and when you are not getting the results from the provisions the Court put into place it can be very frustrating.  But, you do have recourse.  Typically, you can file an enforcement action of temporary orders asking that the wrong be corrected and asking for attorney’s fees for having to go back to Court and ask the judge to tell someone to do what they were already ordered to do.  If it is a failure to pay child support, the violating party also faces possible jail time.  You will have to be able to prove that the temporary orders were put in place, prove the violations, and then the burden becomes the other party’s to state why they did all of those things.  Depending upon those reasons, the Court may be a little lenient upon the person.  It is always a hope that the Court would at least grant your attorney’s fees for your attorney’s time to draft the enforcement and have the hearing.

Continue Reading

by

What is the law in Texas on marriage fraud?

The first step in determining whether or not you qualify for an annulment based upon fraud is to ensure that you fit within the parameters of the law on this issue.  Specifically, Texas Family Code Section 6.107 states that, “a trial court may grant an annulment of marriage to a party to the marriage if (1) the other party used fraud, duress, or force to induce the petitioner to enter into the marriage; and (2) the petitioner has not voluntarily cohabitated with the other party since learning of the fraud or being released from the duress or force.”  Therefore, if someone used fraud to get you to marry them and you stopped living with them after you learned of the fraud, you qualify so far.  The next question becomes, what constitutes as fraud?  Many Texas Appellate Courts have addressed this issue and have come up with a standard as follows, “Fraudulent inducement is established by proving that a false material representation was made that (1) was known to be false when it was made; (2) was intended to be acted upon; (3) was relied upon; and (4) caused injury.”  See Desta v. Anyaoha, 371 S.W.3d 596, 600 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.); Zhang v. Zhang, not reported.  Therefore, if your spouse says something to you prior to marriage that is false and you depend upon that false statement to marry them and then you find out and it has caused you injury in any way you might have a strong legal argument for an annulment.

What is an example?

Continue Reading

by

If you have a final decree or final order in a family law case with an obvious mistake from what the trial court ordered or the parties agreed, you can get it fixed through what is called a Nunc Pro Tunc.  The key is that this mistake has to be a clerical error—did it mix up the judgment of the court.  It cannot be one that requires “judicial reasoning and determination” or in other words any thought process on the judge’s part.  If it is in fact a clerical error, then under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the trial court can fix this clerical error at any time.

What is an Example of a Clerical Error?

In Bernardo Reyes v. Olga Reyes, the Amarillo Seventh District Court of Appeals had to address this issue.  In that case, the trial court made an initial order on the record divorcing the parties and making appropriate orders regarding conservatorship and child support.  Most importantly, the trial court ordered that mother be the parent who has the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the children and father to pay child support. The trial court rendered the orders on the record but the final decree was never actually signed by the court until three years later.  The problem was that the actual decree ordered mother to pay child support.  Mom filed a nunc pro tunc to fix this obvious error.  The trial court entered the nunc pro tunc, correcting the error that it was actually father who was supposed to be paying child support.  Father challenged that.  In reviewing the trial court’s record, the appellate court was able to determine that this was in fact a clerical error and affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

Continue Reading

by

Your spouse has filed for divorce but tells you that you guys can agree on everything and that you do not need an attorney.  They also tell you that you do not even have to be served by process server but instead that you can sign a “waiver”.  This means that you sign the document, accept the petition informally from your spouse, and you will not be formally served by a process server or constable.  Many people just sign the waiver without even knowing what it means or consulting with an attorney.  The reality is you probably do not want to sign this.  Reason being, when you sign this document you waive citation, filing an answer, and further notice in your divorce.  Thus, if your spouse wanted to they could proceed forward with whatever final orders that they wanted to present to the court giving you absolutely none of the property and/or no rights to your children.

An example of just how bad a waiver of service could be is found in Garduza v. Castillo from the 5th District Dallas County Court of Appeals.   In that case, the husband appealed a Dallas trial court’s opinion to allow a default judgment order against husband and in favor of wife.  The wife initially filed a pro se (not represented by an attorney) petition for divorce and represented to the trial court that she and her husband would agree on everything.  Husband then filed a waiver of service that waived everything—future notice of any hearings, citation, filing an answer, being a part of the case.  After that, the wife hired an attorney (because apparently she could not get that agreement) and they filed a couple of amended petitions seeking primary of the children, back child support, and other issues.  The wife and her attorney then proceeded forward to the default docket and presented an order to the trial court which was signed because the husband filed a waiver.  However, once the husband received a copy of the decree he was not very happy.  All of the orders were completely against what he and his wife had initially discussed and he was not in agreement with the trial court’s determinations.  Thus, he proceeded forward with an appeal.  He still did not get an attorney and filed the appeal himself.  The appeal was not properly filed; however, because the appellate court determined that husband was never “served” properly with the amended petitions this was sufficient to grant the appeal.  That is, the appellate court did recognize that husband filed a waiver of service.  However, the appellate court determined that wife filed two amended petitions and they were never “served” on the husband as required by Texas Rules of Procedure Rule 21a.  That is, once you sign a waiver or even if you are served by a process server, if the other party files any additional affirmative pleadings they must give you proper notice of this.  This is accomplished through sending the additional affirmative pleadings via certified mail return receipt requested.  The appellate court found that the wife did not do this and thus they could overrule the trial court’s orders.

Chances are you will not be as lucky as Mr. Garduza.  He genuinely skated by and got another bite at the apple from the sheer fact that his spouse filed amended petitions and failed to serve him those by mail.  If they had not filed amended petitions and just proceeded forward with what the wife wanted in the orders, this would not have been a successful appeal.   There are actually three morals to this story—always get an attorney to protect your rights and interests; do not sign a waiver unless you are absolutely certain of the orders that will be presented to the court AND you attend all hearings; and you have to be served by a process server with the initial pleading unless you sign a waiver of service and then all future notice goes to you by certified mail.  If you are facing this situation, contact an attorney at Guest & Gray today.

by

Are you facing a divorce with your spouse and you are concerned that you are not the father of your child?  You have probably always had that feeling (given your spouse’s cheating history) that you are not the child’s biological father but you just have never acted on that feeling.  However, now that you are facing a divorce you feel that it is important to raise this as an issue and deny your paternity.  Absent addressing all of the issues that can arise with a denial of paternity, you need to know what can happen in the interim while the case is pending.  You may not be the biological father, but you still may be the presumed father.

What is a presumed father?

You are the presumed father for all legal purposes if one of the following is true: you are married to the mother and the child was born during the marriage; you married the mother before the birth of the child even if the marriage could be invalid; you married the mother before the birth of the child and your name is on the birth certificate.  This means, even if you are not the biological father of the child you are the father in the eyes of the law.  Therefore, the judge can make orders according to that legal fact and most likely will do so.

Continue Reading

by

You have been served with a petition for divorce and it states you have to file an answer by 10:00 a.m. on the Monday next after the expiration of 20 days.  However, you have been working things out with your soon-to-be-ex spouse and you guys have agreed upon everything. Your spouse tells you that the service part is just part of the legal process and you do not have to do anything because you have already signed the agreed decree.  However, once everything is said and done the district clerk’s office mails you a copy of the decree and it is not the one you signed.  In fact, it contains terms that are the complete opposite as to what you agreed.  You are shocked and you have no idea what to do; according to the final decree mailed to you, your ex-spouse is taking the children, the home, and the car.

You contact an attorney and find out that your ex-spouse actually waited for your answer period to expire and then went before the judge and asked for a “default” divorce on the basis of you not answering or making an appearance.  The judge, not knowing the background of the case and relying upon the ex-spouse’s allegations, granted the default divorce and now you must work to get that reversed.

The good news is you do have a form of recourse.  You can file a motion to set aside the default judgment and a motion for new trial.  In order to be successful on this type of motion, it is important that you know the grounds for doing so.  Luckily, several appellate courts have discussed this test, also known as the Craddock elements.  It was recently discussed again by the Texarkana 6th District Court of Appeals in In the Matter of the Marriage of Lucas Woods and Jessica Woods and In the Interest of L.K.L.W. and S.B.L.W., Children.  This Court held that to analyze whether a motion for new trial should be granted and to set aside a default judgment, the trial courts must look at the following factors: “(1) the failure of the defendant to answer before judgment was not intentional, or the result of conscious indifference on his part, but was due to a mistake or accident; (2) the motion for a new trial sets up a meritorious defense; and (3) granting the motion will occasion no delay or otherwise work an injury to the plaintiff.”

Continue Reading