His, Hers, Ours: Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage
Today’s family unit is often in a state of flux. After a divorce, most people remarry and often there are children involved. In the new, blended family, one or both spouses may be paying child support. Newly-born or adopted children may also enter into the picture.
Sometimes, the cycle continues: marriage, divorce, remarriage, divorce.
Now, mom or dad has children in multiple households.
Do the additional children change the amount of child support to be paid? Not without a court order.
In Texas, child support may be reduced when an obligor (person paying child support) has additional children that the obligor is legally required to support. These children may be new biological children, or legally adopted children. Generally, Texas courts do not consider stepchildren as a factor in reducing child support.
Texas courts follow statutory guidelines in determining amount of child support. Many people are familiar with the following basic formula: 20% of net income for one child; 25% of net income for two children; 30% of net income for three children; and so on.
However, under the legal guidelines, the court also considers whether the obligor has a legal obligation to support other children, either under another child support order or because the obligor has legal custody of the child. In cases involving the children in multiple households, the court may consult the following chart from Section 154.129 of the Texas Family Code:
CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES
BASED ON THE MONTHLY NET RESOURCES OF THE OBLIGOR
1 child 20% of Obligor’s Net Resources
2 children 25% of Obligor’s Net Resources
3 children 30% of Obligor’s Net Resources
4 children 35% of Obligor’s Net Resources
5 children 40% of Obligor’s Net Resources
6+ children Not less than the amount for 5 children
Depending on the number of other children an obligor has a duty to support, the percentage of child support may be lower. For example, if the obligor was previously married and has 1 child to support in the previous marriage, the amount of support paid for one child before the court decreases to 17.50 percent. See the chart below.
|
Multiple Family Adjusted Guidelines (% of Net Resources) Net Monthly Resources X Percentage Below = Monthly Child Support Obligation
|
||||||||
|
Number of other children for whom the obligor has a duty of support |
Number of Children Before the Court |
|||||||
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
|
0 |
20.00 |
25.00 |
30.00 |
35.00 |
40.00 |
40.00 |
40.00 |
|
|
1 |
17.50 |
22.50 |
27.38 |
32.20 |
37.33 |
37.71 |
38.00 |
|
|
2 |
16.00 |
20.63 |
25.20 |
30.33 |
35.43 |
36.00 |
36.44 |
|
|
3 |
14.75 |
19.00 |
24.00 |
29.00 |
34.00 |
34.67 |
35.20 |
|
|
4 |
13.60 |
18.33 |
23.14 |
28.00 |
32.89 |
33.60 |
34.18 |
|
|
5 |
13.33 |
17.86 |
22.50 |
27.22 |
32.00 |
32.73 |
33.33 |
|
|
6 |
13.14 |
17.50 |
22.00 |
26.60 |
31.27 |
32.00 |
32.62 |
|
|
7 |
13.00 |
17.22 |
21.60 |
26.09 |
30.67 |
31.38 |
32.00 |
|
The court may also consider additional factors listed in Section 154.123 of the Texas Family Code.
In order to benefit from these factors, the obligor must present evidence that rebuts the presumption that the statutory guidelines is in the best interest of the children. When a person has children in more than one household, determining child support can be complicated. A wise person will seek the professional help of an experienced family law attorney.
Texas HB No. 274 Omnibus Tort Reform Bill Passes
Lawsuits are expensive, too expensive for many people. Even when you know you are right, most average people and small businesses cannot afford to pursue their rights under contracts or seek remedies for other legal wrongs. When the legal costs and attorneys’ fees surpass the potential recovery, the average person makes the decision to take their losses and move on.
Under new legislation passed by the Texas legislature, the Texas Supreme Court has been directed to adopt new rules to address the high costs and long time periods affecting lawsuits involving damages of $100,000.00 or less. The new law appears to create a new class of law suits under the title of “Expedited Civil Actions.”
The law requires the Supreme Court to adopt rules: (1) to lower discovery costs and (2) to expedite procedures in these cases involving smaller monetary damages.
In adopting new rules, the Supreme Court cannot adopt rules that conflict with existing provisions of the Texas family code, property code, tax code or chapter 74 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
Until the Supreme Court adopts the new rules, many questions remain unanswered. However, the Court may provide some relief to small business people and individuals who suffer damages under $100,000.00.
Another aspect of HB 274 concerns the payment of litigation costs when a settlement offer is made. Under the new law, litigation costs may be awarded when a qualifying settlement offer is rejected.
In order to qualify for the award of litigation costs, the defendant must make a qualifying settlement offer. The law provides that the settlement offer must: (1) be in writing; (2) indentify that the offer is being made under chapter 42.003 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code; (3) state the terms of the settlement; (4) contain a deadline for acceptance; and (5) be served on all parties to whom the settlement offer is made.
If the plaintiff rejects a qualifying settlement offer, litigation costs may be awarded under the current 80/20 statutory framework. Litigation costs are defined to include court costs, reasonable depositions costs, reasonable fees for not more than two testifying experts and reasonable attorney’s fees.
HB 274 is effective September 1, 2011
Texas SB785: Termination of Parent-Child Relationship due to Mistaken Paternity
We hear a lot about dead-beat dads, or parents who do not pay their child support obligations. Now it is time for “fathers” or men who have been paying child support for children who are not their biological children to assert their rights.
Texas has a new law, Texas SB785, which permits men who have been ordered to pay child support, without genetic testing, to request genetic testing in order to determine whether they are the genetic parent of the child.
But the clock is ticking. If you suspect that you are paying child support for a child who is not your biological child, you must file the petition before September 1, 2012.
After September 1, 2012, a man must file a petition to determine genetic parentage no later than the first anniversary of the date on which he becomes aware of facts indicating that he is not the child’s genetic father.
In order to file for relief under this new law, the man must have signed an acknowledgement of paternity or failed to contest paternity in the previous proceeding because of a mistaken belief that he was the child’s father based on misrepresentations that led him to that conclusion.
If the man knew he was not the father at the time he signed the acknowledgement of paternity or the previous court order, the new law does not apply.
If the genetic testing concludes that the man is not the child’s genetic father, the court shall render an order terminating the parent-child relationship and terminating the man’s obligation for future child support.
The new order, however, does not affect the man’s obligations for child support or child support arrearages accrued before the date of the order. However, the accrued obligations are not enforceable by contempt proceedings.
Even if the parent-child relationship is terminated, the man may request the court to order period of possession or access to the child following the termination. The court may order periods of possession or access to the child only if the court determines that denial of possession or access would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional well-being. The law directs the court to focus on the child’s well-being, not on the man’s desire to continue seeing the child.
If you have been paying child support due to a mistaken belief that you were the father, the time to act is now. If you wait to file for relief, you will be barred. Contact an attorney now!
BY ALL MEANS STOP THE FORECLOSURE
Given the current state of affairs with regard to lenders, mortgagees, loan servicing agencies, collection agencies and the like with respect to home or business mortgages, it is frequently impossible to determine with whom you are speaking, what authority they have and what remedies they are actually capable of agreeing to in a home or business loan dispute. Indeed, frequently the actual owner of the debt is so lost in cybernetic space on Wall Street that a signature cannot even be produced to consummate a valid foreclosure.
I frequently speak with people whose loans have been overcharged or convoluted under the guise of late payments and fees, penalty interest, attorney’s fees, reinstatement fees and the like when in fact payments are current or the delay in receipt is due to the bookkeeping errors or computer generated nightmares which frequently exist at mortgage companies and/or servicing lenders. Clients are lost in the backlog of understaffed and overworked mortgage companies who simply make entries that are either late, erroneous, unjustified or not representative of the actual payments that have been submitted to them by the borrowers/homeowners.
The lenders then, usually through computer generated directives, retain attorneys and foreclose or simply foreclose through the existing trustees or substitute trustees when, in point of fact, the loan is current or if it is not current, the disputed sums claimed or their timeliness it is not the fault of the borrower.
It is critical that a homeowner in this situation make an immediate effort to get a court order enjoining the foreclosure before the foreclosure occurs. There are a myriad of legal rights, remedies, defenses and claims that are either lost or seriously watered down when asserted after the foreclosure sale occurs. It is far easier to put the dry spaghetti in stacks and separate it as appropriate than to try to unravel the spaghetti once it has been cooked. Lenders who proceed with foreclosure are by deed granted legal title, or title is passed to a third party purchaser by virtue of the loan documents and the foreclosure sale. This makes it more difficult for an attorney to enforce the rights of the borrower given the claims, expense and costs of the third parties, tying your lawyer’s hands to some degree in what he is capable of doing for you to save your home or business property.
A temporary restraining order injunction upon proper affidavit with sufficient facts is in most cases granted allowing a home or business owner to enforce his claims against the lender or mortgage company while retaining title to the property during the litigation process which can take anywhere from thirty days to three years depending on the court, the county and the jurisdiction.
It is not uncommon for the court to order the borrower to pay all payments into the court registry or an escrow fund where a true and honest accounting of what is being paid while the case is pending can be applied to the final judgment of the court. If the borrower/homeowner’s case has merit and the lender is in breach, state law permits the payment of attorney’s fees in addition to the claims for fees which are ordinarily authorized in form loan documents which puts added pressure on the lender/mortgagee to come to the table and settle the matter based on the actual facts of the case. However, these efforts are hampered greatly if the foreclosure has already occurred. Remember also that a lawyer needs, depending on the court and jurisdiction, enough time in advance of the foreclosure sale date to prepare a petition, temporary restraining order, and request for injunctive relief and/or claim for damages as the case may be in order to properly enforce the rights of the client.
Sadly enough, it is not uncommon for the first words of the client to be “They foreclosed on my house and all my payments are current, what are we going to do now?” The regrettable answer is, we are going to have to set aside the foreclosure and reverse all the legal title convoluted actions which have occurred by virtue of the Trustee Sale, in addition to making a legal effort to reinstate the loan. In most cases this is far more expensive to the client in attorney’s fees, time and consternation than simply preventing the sale in the first place by injunction.
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.
NACOL LAW FIRM P.C.
8144 Walnut Hill Lane
Suite 1190
Dallas, Texas 75231
972-690-3333
Office Hours
Monday – Thursday, 8am – 5pm
Friday, 8:30am – 5pm
OUR BLOGS
SEARCH
JOIN OUR NETWORK
Attorney Mark A. Nacol is board certified in Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
