When a custody lawsuit commences, parents need to be thinking primarily about what is in the best interest of the child(ren). The needs and rights of the child(ren) are of paramount importance in a child custody case and the court’s primary focus.
In accordance with Section 153.002 of the Texas Family Code, parents are ordinarily considered to be equal in their right to parent their child(ren). It is the best interests of the child(ren) that are paramount, and the aim of the Texas Family Code is to:
1. Assure that child(ren) will have frequent and continuing contact with parents who have shown the ability to act in the best interest of the child(ren);
2. Provide a safe, stable, and non-violent environment for the child(ren); and
3. Encourage parents to share in the rights and duties of raising their child(ren) after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage.
If you are a parent who is preparing for a custody battle, you would do well to make this your primary goal throughout the litigation.
Vengeful parents often engage in destructive conduct by trying to move out of state in an attempt to separate the child(ren) geographically from the non-custodial parent. If vengeance is the custodial parent’s primary motive, this has many benefits: it becomes more difficult for the non-custodial parent to exercise visitation, and at the same time makes it more difficult (and expensive) for the non-custodial parent to seek relief through the courts for denied visitation or other wrongful acts by the custodial parent. A move-away, depending upon distance, can also isolate the child(ren) from the non-custodial parent. If you suspect your spouse may do this, you need to be prepared and act proactively. A key item to have incorporated into final paperwork is an “anti-move-away” clause. Essentially, this states that if the custodial parent moves more than a certain number of miles away, custody changes to the remaining parent and/or restricting the permanent domicile of the child(ren) to designated counties.
Stay meaningfully involved in your child(ren)’s lives on a regular and continuing basis. Being heavily involved with your child(ren) for very short periods of time will not bring favor in the eyes of the court.
Keep a detailed record or diary of the details of how much you have been involved with your child(ren)’s school and extracurricular activities. Attend school meetings. Take pictures. Schedule family vacations. Visit relatives and friends and schedule sleepovers with your child(ren)’s peers. Take your child(ren) to the dentist and the doctor. Don’t spoil your child(ren), reasonably discipline your child(ren) when necessary and document why you took such action. Take advantage of extra time extended you by your spouse and try to extend visitation when possible if only for a couple of hours. Initiate and support birthdays, school activities, and college requirements. Document all relevant case issues and facts.
Keep in mind that your child(ren) are not equipped to deal with the range of emotions experienced by an adult, and that ventilating your personal difficulties on them is not only unhelpful, but can be a form of abuse and can create lasting emotional scars and is viewed with disfavor in the courthouse.
Parents preparing for custody cases before the court in Texas must be mindful of the extraordinary damage they can do when denigrating the other spouse in front of their child(ren). Such behavior is not only damaging to the child(ren), but may and usually will, be taken into consideration by the court. A noticeable failure to maintain self-control may be considered an indicator of an inability to parent.
If you can remain involved in your child(ren)’s lives enough to find out how his or her relationship is with your former spouse, you may be able to build a better case to show the court you are the better custodial parent, and in the meantime productively provide for your child(ren) in his or her best interest.
Showing posts with label texas family code. Show all posts
Showing posts with label texas family code. Show all posts
Friday, August 21, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Divorce: What is separate property and what is community property?
Under the Texas Family Code, a spouses separate property consists of 1) the property owned or claimed by the spouse before marriage; 2) the property acquired by the spouse during marriage by gift, devise, or descent, and 3) the recovery for personal injuries sustained by the spouse during marriage, except any recovery for loss of earning capacity during marriage.
The terms “owned and claimed” as used in the Texas Family Code mean that where the right to the property accrued before marriage, the property would be separate. Inception of title occurs when a party first has a right of claim to the property by virtue of which title is finally vested. The existence or nonexistence of the marriage at the time of incipiency of the right of which title finally vests determines whether property is community or separate. Inception of title occurs when a party first has a right of claim to the property.
Under Texas Constitution, Art. XVI, Section 15, separate property is defined as all property, both real and personal, of a spouse owned or claimed before marriage, and that acquired afterward by gift, devise or descent, shall be the separate property of that spouse; and laws shall be passed more clearly defining the rights of the spouses, in relation to separate and community property; provided that persons about to marry and spouses, without the intention to defraud pre-existing creditors, may by written instrument from time to time partition between themselves all or part of their property, then existing or to be acquired, or exchange between themselves the community interest of one spouse or future spouse in any property for the community interest of the other spouse or future spouse in other community property then existing or to be acquired, whereupon the portion or interest set aside to each spouse shall be and constitute a part of the separate property and estate of such spouse or future spouse; spouses may also from time to time, by written instrument, agree between themselves that the income or property from all or part of the separate property then owned or which thereafter might be acquired by only one of them, shall be the separate property of that spouse; if one spouse makes a gift of property to the other that gift is presumed to include all income or property which might arise from that gift of property; and spouses may agree in writing that all or part of the separate property owned by either or both of them shall be the spouses’ community property.
In 1917 the Legislature defined and income from separate property to be the separate property of the owner spouse. In Arnold v. Leonard, 114 Tex. 535,273 S.W. 799 (1925), the Supreme Court held that the Legislature did not have the constitutional authority to characterize the income from separate property as the owner’s separate property. The court explained that the Legislature’s authority was limited to enacting laws regulating the management and liability of marital property, not its separate or community character. This decision strengthened the constitutional principal that the Legislature may not define what is community and separate property in a manner inconsistent with Article 16, Section 15 of the Texas Constitution.
There are numerous means by which separate property may be acquired in defiance of Article 16, Section 15, a partial list includes mutations of separate property, increases in value of separate land and personality, recovery for personal injury not measured by loss of earning power, improvements of separate land with an unascertainable amount of community funds, and United States Securities purchased with community funds.
Although such property may undergo changes or mutations, as long as it is traced and properly identified it will remain separate property.
The Texas Family Code defines community property as follows: “community property consists of the property, other than separate property, acquired by either spouse during marriage.”
Texas Family Code, Section 3.003 states that all property possessed by either spouse during or at the dissolution of the marriage is presumed to be community property and that the degree of proof necessary to establish that property is separate property, rather than community property, is clear and convincing evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is defined as that measure or degree of proof that will produce in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the truth of the allegations sought to be established. If property cannot be proved to be separate property, then it is deemed to be community property.
The Texas Family Code, Section 7.002, deals with quasi-community property and requires a court divide property wherever the property is situated, if 1) the property was acquired by either spouse while domiciled in another state and the property would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property had been domiciled in Texas at the time of acquisition; or 2) property was acquired by either spouse in exchange for real or personal property and that property would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property so exchanged had been domiciled in Texas at the time of the acquisition.
The terms “owned and claimed” as used in the Texas Family Code mean that where the right to the property accrued before marriage, the property would be separate. Inception of title occurs when a party first has a right of claim to the property by virtue of which title is finally vested. The existence or nonexistence of the marriage at the time of incipiency of the right of which title finally vests determines whether property is community or separate. Inception of title occurs when a party first has a right of claim to the property.
Under Texas Constitution, Art. XVI, Section 15, separate property is defined as all property, both real and personal, of a spouse owned or claimed before marriage, and that acquired afterward by gift, devise or descent, shall be the separate property of that spouse; and laws shall be passed more clearly defining the rights of the spouses, in relation to separate and community property; provided that persons about to marry and spouses, without the intention to defraud pre-existing creditors, may by written instrument from time to time partition between themselves all or part of their property, then existing or to be acquired, or exchange between themselves the community interest of one spouse or future spouse in any property for the community interest of the other spouse or future spouse in other community property then existing or to be acquired, whereupon the portion or interest set aside to each spouse shall be and constitute a part of the separate property and estate of such spouse or future spouse; spouses may also from time to time, by written instrument, agree between themselves that the income or property from all or part of the separate property then owned or which thereafter might be acquired by only one of them, shall be the separate property of that spouse; if one spouse makes a gift of property to the other that gift is presumed to include all income or property which might arise from that gift of property; and spouses may agree in writing that all or part of the separate property owned by either or both of them shall be the spouses’ community property.
In 1917 the Legislature defined and income from separate property to be the separate property of the owner spouse. In Arnold v. Leonard, 114 Tex. 535,273 S.W. 799 (1925), the Supreme Court held that the Legislature did not have the constitutional authority to characterize the income from separate property as the owner’s separate property. The court explained that the Legislature’s authority was limited to enacting laws regulating the management and liability of marital property, not its separate or community character. This decision strengthened the constitutional principal that the Legislature may not define what is community and separate property in a manner inconsistent with Article 16, Section 15 of the Texas Constitution.
There are numerous means by which separate property may be acquired in defiance of Article 16, Section 15, a partial list includes mutations of separate property, increases in value of separate land and personality, recovery for personal injury not measured by loss of earning power, improvements of separate land with an unascertainable amount of community funds, and United States Securities purchased with community funds.
Although such property may undergo changes or mutations, as long as it is traced and properly identified it will remain separate property.
The Texas Family Code defines community property as follows: “community property consists of the property, other than separate property, acquired by either spouse during marriage.”
Texas Family Code, Section 3.003 states that all property possessed by either spouse during or at the dissolution of the marriage is presumed to be community property and that the degree of proof necessary to establish that property is separate property, rather than community property, is clear and convincing evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is defined as that measure or degree of proof that will produce in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the truth of the allegations sought to be established. If property cannot be proved to be separate property, then it is deemed to be community property.
The Texas Family Code, Section 7.002, deals with quasi-community property and requires a court divide property wherever the property is situated, if 1) the property was acquired by either spouse while domiciled in another state and the property would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property had been domiciled in Texas at the time of acquisition; or 2) property was acquired by either spouse in exchange for real or personal property and that property would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property so exchanged had been domiciled in Texas at the time of the acquisition.
Monday, June 29, 2009
A Child’s Testimony and the Law
The Texas Family Code provides for the child to have a voice in the Courtroom. The “voice” appears in many forms and in many places in the Texas Family Code.
Texas Family Code Section 153.008 allows a child to file his/her preference with the Court, if the child is 12 years of age or older. This statute infers that the child’s preference is binding if the Court approves the designation. However, the statute is absent any coercive language. Many argue that the age of 12 is too young or too immature to understand the impact of a preference. “12” is not a magical number. The statute also does not state that the Court must make a determination upon the executed preference.
Although one can view the filing of a preference as a “voice” of the child, many litigants view the filing as a starting place, just a request of the child. The same child who may sign a preference for one parent having the right to determine he said primary residence, may also prefer to live with the other parent. The right to determine the primary residence of the child is not necessarily the right to have primary physical possession – or is it?
The code continually strives to be gender neutral and avoid the use of the term: physical custody. The term “primary physical custody” is not contained in the statute, nor is there any language stating where the child lives or resides. Each parent gets possession for a certain period of time. Yet, no where does the code state “I live with mom/dad.”
Current law also states that a child may be a witness. The Code makes certain that family law will be conducted as other civil cases. Texas Family Code Section 104.002 gives specific rules for admission of a statement of a child who is under 12 years of age, and in cases that involve abuse. The idea is that the statement of the child will be pre-recorded and not simply a deposition. The statute is designated to give some comfort to the child in an atmosphere that may allow that abused child to feel safe. It is clear that 104.002 is designed for cases dealing with abuse only, as it has “exceptions” to what would otherwise be testimony under simple cross examination. The statute applies to children who are under the age of twelve years, with the idea that the statements are not elicited for purpose of establishing a preference, but for the purpose of establishing fact.
Section 153.009 allows an in chamber interview with the child. In a non-jury trial or at a hearing, on the application of a party, the amicus attorney or the attorney ad litem for the child, the court SHALL interview in chambers a child 12 years of age or older and MAY interview in chambers a child under 12 years of age to determine the child’s wishes as to conservatorship or as to the person who shall have the exclusive right to determine the child’s primary residence. The court may also interview a child in chambers on the court’s own motion for a purpose specified by this subsection.
In a non-jury trial or at a hearing on the application of a party, the amicus attorney, or the attorney ad litem for the child or on the court’s own motion, the court may interview the child in chambers to determine the child’s wishes as to possession, access or any other issue in the suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Interviewing the child does not diminish the discretion or the court in determining the best interest of the child. In a jury trial, the court may not interview the child in chambers regarding an issue on which a party is entitled to a jury verdict. In any trial or hearing, the court may permit the attorney for a party, the amicus attorney, the guardian ad litem for the child, or the attorney ad litem for the child to be present at the interview. On the motion of a party, the amicus attorney, or the attorney ad litem for the child, or on the court’s own motion, the court shall cause a record of the interview to be made with the child is 12 years of age or older. A record of the interview shall be part of the record in the case.
Under current law, the interview of a child in chambers is limited to a non-jury case and does not have any place in a jury trial. However, the statute is clear that the interview can lead to much more information for the Court than simply questioning the child’s wishes as to conservatorship. There is very little case law to guide the practitioner on this point.
There is nothing in the Family Code that precludes a child from testifying in a deposition. The use of deposition testimony may be the best approach to obtaining a child’s testimony in a jury trial. The parties may even agree to take the deposition at a place other than the law office, allowing a less hostile environment.
The use of pictures and family videos is another way to get a child’s voice heard.
Texas Family Code Section 153.008 allows a child to file his/her preference with the Court, if the child is 12 years of age or older. This statute infers that the child’s preference is binding if the Court approves the designation. However, the statute is absent any coercive language. Many argue that the age of 12 is too young or too immature to understand the impact of a preference. “12” is not a magical number. The statute also does not state that the Court must make a determination upon the executed preference.
Although one can view the filing of a preference as a “voice” of the child, many litigants view the filing as a starting place, just a request of the child. The same child who may sign a preference for one parent having the right to determine he said primary residence, may also prefer to live with the other parent. The right to determine the primary residence of the child is not necessarily the right to have primary physical possession – or is it?
The code continually strives to be gender neutral and avoid the use of the term: physical custody. The term “primary physical custody” is not contained in the statute, nor is there any language stating where the child lives or resides. Each parent gets possession for a certain period of time. Yet, no where does the code state “I live with mom/dad.”
Current law also states that a child may be a witness. The Code makes certain that family law will be conducted as other civil cases. Texas Family Code Section 104.002 gives specific rules for admission of a statement of a child who is under 12 years of age, and in cases that involve abuse. The idea is that the statement of the child will be pre-recorded and not simply a deposition. The statute is designated to give some comfort to the child in an atmosphere that may allow that abused child to feel safe. It is clear that 104.002 is designed for cases dealing with abuse only, as it has “exceptions” to what would otherwise be testimony under simple cross examination. The statute applies to children who are under the age of twelve years, with the idea that the statements are not elicited for purpose of establishing a preference, but for the purpose of establishing fact.
Section 153.009 allows an in chamber interview with the child. In a non-jury trial or at a hearing, on the application of a party, the amicus attorney or the attorney ad litem for the child, the court SHALL interview in chambers a child 12 years of age or older and MAY interview in chambers a child under 12 years of age to determine the child’s wishes as to conservatorship or as to the person who shall have the exclusive right to determine the child’s primary residence. The court may also interview a child in chambers on the court’s own motion for a purpose specified by this subsection.
In a non-jury trial or at a hearing on the application of a party, the amicus attorney, or the attorney ad litem for the child or on the court’s own motion, the court may interview the child in chambers to determine the child’s wishes as to possession, access or any other issue in the suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Interviewing the child does not diminish the discretion or the court in determining the best interest of the child. In a jury trial, the court may not interview the child in chambers regarding an issue on which a party is entitled to a jury verdict. In any trial or hearing, the court may permit the attorney for a party, the amicus attorney, the guardian ad litem for the child, or the attorney ad litem for the child to be present at the interview. On the motion of a party, the amicus attorney, or the attorney ad litem for the child, or on the court’s own motion, the court shall cause a record of the interview to be made with the child is 12 years of age or older. A record of the interview shall be part of the record in the case.
Under current law, the interview of a child in chambers is limited to a non-jury case and does not have any place in a jury trial. However, the statute is clear that the interview can lead to much more information for the Court than simply questioning the child’s wishes as to conservatorship. There is very little case law to guide the practitioner on this point.
There is nothing in the Family Code that precludes a child from testifying in a deposition. The use of deposition testimony may be the best approach to obtaining a child’s testimony in a jury trial. The parties may even agree to take the deposition at a place other than the law office, allowing a less hostile environment.
The use of pictures and family videos is another way to get a child’s voice heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
