May 2009
Spanking With Spark Plug Wire Not Family Violence
May 19, 2009
The Amarillo Court of Appeals affirmed a trial
court's decision to appoint a father as joint
managing conservator because the trial court found no
credible evidence of family violence even though the
father admitted backhanding one stepson, spanking
another with a spark plug wire, jerking his
daughter's arm and threatening to spank her by taking
off his belt, hitting the filing cabinet with it and
telling the daughter that he would "give her a reason
to cry."In the Interest of B.R.P., No.
11-07-00255-CV (Tex. App. - Amarillo May 14, 2009).
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
No Ineffective Assistance of Counsel for Divorce
May 12, 2009
The Texas Supreme Court has adopted the criminal-law
rule that a party is entitled to effective assistance
of counsel in termination cases. But that right does
not extend to divorce cases: There is no
constitutional right to effective assistance of
counsel on divorce. Chrisman v. Chrisman, No.
08-06-00337-CV (Tex. App. - El Paso May 6, 2009).
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Must Warn of Right to Counsel on Contempt
May 05, 2009
The trial court ordered a father to pay child
support. When he failed to do so, the trial court
held him in contempt of court but suspended his
commitment to jail. Later, at a compliance hearing,
the trial court committed the father to jail for
failure to pay child support. The Court of Appeals
granted the father's petition for writ of habeas
corpus because the trial court did not admonish him
of his right to counsel or seek his knowing and
intelligent waiver of that right. In re:
Casey, No. 01-08-00928-CV (Tex. App. - Houston
[1st Dist.] Apr. 30, 2009, orig. proceeding).
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Military Retirement Pay Does Not Include Disability Pay
May 01, 2009
A divorce decree awarded the wife a portion of the
husband's military retirement pay. Sixteen years
later, the husband retired from the military, and
eleven years after that, the Veteran's Administration
determined that he had a service-connected
disability. The husband elected to waive part of his
retirement pay and receive disability payments from
the Veteran's Administration instead. The former wife
sued to require the husband to continue to pay her
share of the military retirement pay based on the
full amount before waiver, but the Texas Supreme
Court held that the divorce decree divided only
military retirement pay, not Veteran's Administration
disability pay. Hagen v. Hagen, 282 S.W.3d 899
(Tex. 2009).
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas
Courtesy of Verner & Brumley, P.C. Dallas, Texas