<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
	<channel>
<title>Texas Family Law Update</title><link>http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/index.php</link><description>Texas Family Law News and Opinion</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><dc:creator>jvmac@mac.com</dc:creator><dc:rights>Copyright 2009 Jimmy Verner</dc:rights><dc:date>2010-05-05T10:55:28-05:00</dc:date><admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.realmacsoftware.com/" />
<admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:jvmac@mac.com" /><sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<sy:updateBase>2000-01-01T12:00+00:00</sy:updateBase>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 11:06:10 -0500</lastBuildDate><item><title>Y&#x27;all as Core Term in Texas Divorce</title><dc:creator>jvmac@mac.com</dc:creator><category>None</category><dc:date>2010-05-05T10:55:28-05:00</dc:date><link>http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/yall-as-core-term-in-texas-divorce.php#unique-entry-id-44</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/yall-as-core-term-in-texas-divorce.php#unique-entry-id-44</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[Did you know that Lexis considers "y'all" a "core term" for research purposes? In an otherwise unremarkable case where an appellate court denied a divorce appeal because of inadequate briefing, the opinion quoted the trial court's use of the contraction repeatedly. Apparently the Lexis algorithm thought it must be important. <i>Dawson v. Dawson,</i> 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 3234 (Tex. App. - Austin Apr. 30, 2010, n.p.h.) (Memorandum Opinion).<span style="font-size:13px; "><br /></span><span style="font-size:13px; "><br /></span><i>Courtesy of</i>  <a href="http://www.vernerbrumley.com">Verner & Brumley, P.C.</a>   Dallas, Texas]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Ask for an Annulment Quickly</title><dc:creator>jvmac@mac.com</dc:creator><dc:subject>Texas Family Law Update</dc:subject><dc:date>2010-04-14T10:23:13-05:00</dc:date><link>http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/ask-for-an-annulment-quickly.php#unique-entry-id-42</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/ask-for-an-annulment-quickly.php#unique-entry-id-42</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[Did you know? In Texas, a couple is not supposed to marry within 72 hours after they obtain a marriage license. But if they break the rule and then decide they want to annul their marriage, they must file suit within thirty days of marriage. Tex. Fam. Code &sect; 6.110.<br /><br /><i>Courtesy of</i>  <a href="http://www.vernerbrumley.com">Verner & Brumley, P.C.</a>   Dallas, Texas]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Characterization of Trust Distributions</title><dc:creator>jvmac@mac.com</dc:creator><dc:subject>Texas Family Law Update</dc:subject><dc:date>2010-02-25T12:01:57-06:00</dc:date><link>http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/characterization-of-trust-distributions.php#unique-entry-id-41</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.texasfamilylawupdate.com/files/characterization-of-trust-distributions.php#unique-entry-id-41</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[Houston's 14th District Court of Appeals held that distributions from a testamentary trust to a husband during marriage are community property only if the husband held a present possessory right to the corpus. <i>Sharma v. Routh,</i> No. 14-06-00717-CV (Tex. App. - Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 8, 2009).<br /><br /><i>Courtesy of</i>  <a href="http://www.vernerbrumley.com">Verner & Brumley, P.C.</a>   Dallas, Texas]]></content:encoded></item></channel>
</rss>