San Antonio, TX Family Law and Military Divorce Blog

As a general rule, Texas courts do not award post-divorce spousal maintenance easily.  When awarded, however, the maximum amount the law allows is the lesser of $5,000 per month or 20% of the paying spouse's average monthly gross income.

The Family Code specifically exempts VA disability compensation from being counted among average monthly gross income.  See Tex. Fam.

In Texas, estates of military servicemembers who die in active service in a combat zone are exempt are exempt from the following fees:

1. Any fee for filing for probate of the deceased servicemember's Will; and,
2. Any fee charged by the probate court for rendering its normal services.

"Combat zones" are designated by the President by Executive Order under authority granted by 26 U.S.C. Section 112, which is the section of the IRS code that excludes gross compensation received in a combat zone from taxable income.  Currently, there are three designated "combat zones" (including airspace above) as follows:

• Arabian Peninsula Areas, beginning Jan. 17, 1991 -- the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, Gulf of Oman, the part of the Arabian Sea north of 10° North latitude and west of 68° East longitude, the Gulf of Aden, and the countries of Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
• Kosovo area, beginning Mar. 24, 1999 -- Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Albania, the Adriatic Sea and the Ionian Sea north of the 39th Parallel.
• Afghanistan, beginning Sept. 19, 2001.

Information on the three areas above and others previously designated as combat zones is available from the IRS.  Speak with a qualified Wills, estates and probate attorney to learn more.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

If after reasonable diligence you are unable to locate your spouse, it remains possible to have them served with legal process for divorce.  The court must consider an affidavit from the spouse seeking the divorce, or his or her attorney, that describes the due diligence before authorizing "Citation by Publication."

As described in Family Code Section 6.409, Citation by Publication in a divorce suit with no children an no appreciable property occurs by posting notice on the courthouse door for a minimum of seven days.  If the missing spouse does not file an answer in response to the notice (which rarely occurs), the court normally must appoint an attorney (called an "attorney ad litem") to represent the interests of the missing spouse.  If, however, the spouse petitioning the court for divorce, or his or her attorney, files an additional affidavit under oath with the court stating that there are no minor children and no appreciable property, the court may dispense with the appointment of an attorney ad litem.  This helps save significant time and cost for the spouse/petitioner.

As in every other divorce, the court cannot grant the divorce until a minimum of 60 days have elapsed since the filing of the original petition.  Other requirements may apply depending on the specific facts of your situation.  Speak with a qualified divorce attorney to see if this quick and convenient route might be available to you.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

In my last blog, we looked at how spouses can dissolve the community estate and create only separate property by executing a Partition & Exchange Agreement.  To read that blog, click here.  I mentioned that in this next blog, we'd look at a scenario where executing a Partition & Exchange Agreement may be a good option in some military divorces.

Sometimes in military divorce, the issue of permitting the soon-to-be-former-spouse the opportunity to quality as a "20/20/20" or "20/20/15" spouse looms large with respect to continued health insurance (i.e. TRICARE).  Qualification as a 20/20/20 spouse means that an unremarried former spouse qualifies to get his or her own ID card and lifetime TRICARE benefits.  Qualification as a 20/20/15 spouse means that an unremarried former spouse qualifies for one-year of TRICARE benefits post-divorce.  To read more directly from TRICARE's website, click here.

By executing a Partition & Exchange Agreement -- that should include "freezing" computations for the division of military retired pay and division of Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) sums, for example -- the servicemember can create an absolute limit to his or her financial obligations in divorce, yet permit the divorce to be entered months later in order to facilitate the soon-to-be-former-spouse who is near, but not yet at, either the 20/20/20 or 20/20/15 benchmark, reach that important milestone. 

To learn more, speak with a qualified military divorce attorney about how a Partition & Exchange Agreement might be a good option in your situation.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

The Texas Constitution and the Texas Family Code both provide that spouses may, at any time, agree to dissolve the community/marital estate so that each spouse possesses only his or her separate property.  This is done through a Partition and Exchange Agreement.

The Partition and Exchange Agreement can, among other things, accomplish the following:

• Identify now existing or after-acquired property as a spouse's separate property;
• Transfer the separate property of one spouse to become the separate property of the other spouse; and,
• Provide that each spouse's future income from his or her separate property remains that spouse's separate property (i.e. the normal rule is that income from separate property is community property; this provision alters that rule).

A Partition and Exchange Agreement contains requirements and features as follows:

• It must be in writing;
• It must be signed by the parties voluntarily after fair and reasonable disclosure of each spouse's assets and debts (or waiver of any such disclosure);
• It is enforceable without "consideration" (i.e. consideration is a term from contract law that means a party to a contract must give something of value to the other party that induces that party to enter into the contract; the consideration given may be money, property, or a promise of performance, for example);
• It cannot be used as a vehicle to defraud creditors; any such provision in a Partition and Exchange Agreement that attempts to defraud a creditor is void;
• It does not require the Court's approval to be valid and enforceable.

The reasons why spouses might consider entering into a Partition and Exchange Agreement are many and varied.  In my next blog, we'll look at one particular scenario that applies to a military family thinking about divorce. 

Speak with a qualified family law attorney to learn more about your unique circumstances may or may not benefit from a Partition and Exchange Agreement.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC, serving clients in throughout the greater San Antonio region, across the United States, and globally.  The firm's main areas of practice include Family Law, Military Divorce, Federal Civil Service Divorce, Wills and Estates, and Probate.

My previous blog discussed steps that attorneys make take to put a divorce case on pause when the parties wish to attempt reconciliation.  To read my previous blog first, click here.  In this blog, we'll answer the question of how long a case can be on pause.

Here's the answer -- there is no absolute time after which a Court must dismiss a case for "want of prosecution" (i.e. dismiss a case based on a prolonged period of inactivity).   As a general rule, a case that demonstrates no activity in roughly a year's time becomes a prime candidates for placement on the "dismissal docket."

Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a give the Court authority to place cases on the dismissal docket for want of prosecution.  The rule requires that notice of placement on the dismissal docket and the time and place for the dismissal hearing must be given to each attorney and party whose address is in the Court's records.  If no appearance is made at the hearing, the case will be dismissed.  If an appearance is made and a valid reason is presented for retaining the case, then the Court will enter an order setting deadlines by which all case activity must be completed (e.g. finishing discovery; filing of additional pleading; and scheduling of final trial).

When a case is dismissed, it's flushed from the Court's system.  The case doesn't exist anymore.  If the parties later decided to proceed with the divorce, they'd have to start all over again, unless a Motion for Reinstatement is filed within 30 days of dismissal (and successfully argued).  If retained on the docket, the parties and attorneys need to get moving and meet the deadlines set by the Court for finishing the case.

In my next blog, we'll look at the steps the parties can take if they decide to dismiss the case by their own initiative.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

Occasionally in divorce, the parties wish to try to reconcile while leaving the suit for divorce active in the Court's system.  The three most common questions are: (1) are there any "official" requirements to put the cause on pause; (2) how long can a case be on pause; and, (3) if we decide to end the divorce, how do we do that?  This blog will deal only with the first question: what, if any, official requirements exist to put a divorce case on pause.  The second and third questions will be dealt with separately in my next two blogs.

Regarding the first question, while there are no official requirements for putting a case on pause, my preferred technique is for the two attorneys to file a "Rule 11 Agreement" that agrees to suspend the litigation, pending further notice.  Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 11 specifies that for any agreement between the parties or attorney to be enforceable by the Court, it must be in writing and filed with the Court (hence, the term "Rule 11 Agreement").  In general, the agreement should state the following:

• That the parties wish to to suspend all litigation activities to provide for a period of time for attempted reconciliation;
• That during the period of suspension, any pending discovery requests are abated (i.e. on hold, with deadlines to be reestablished if the suspension is later lifted), and neither party will initiate any new discovery requests or make settings for further hearings or final trial;
• That either party may terminate the suspension of litigation and resume the case upon written notice to the other party, by and through the other party's attorney of record; and,
• That the Rule 11 Agreement for Suspension of Litigation and an Notice of Termination of Suspension of Litigation shall be filed with the Court.

From a practical perspective, any attempt at reconciliation should be given about 4 to 6 months before the parties decide whether to terminate the divorce.  The 4 to 6 month period is a prudent time frame because a commitment to attempt reconciliation is like falling in love all over again.  It tends to promote a burst of commitment to more kindness and better behavior.  However, and since we humans tend to be creatures of habit, most people tend to slip into old habit patterns somewhere within the 4 to 6 month time period (+/-).  In other words, while long-term positive change in marital behavior is possible, it tends to be difficult to achieve.  Thus, 4 to 6 months is a prudent benchmark for the parties to test if the change each seeks in the marriage has "sticking power."   

 My next blog will address the second question, being how long a divorce case can be on pause.  Stay tuned.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

I get a steady stream of requests from former military spouses and former spouses of Federal Civil Service members for help in obtaining a clarification order that will cause DFAS or OPM to start the former spouse's monthly payments.  Sometimes years have gone by since the military servicemember of civil servant has retired and started receiving retired pay. 

What can and should be done to make things right for the former spouse in the aftermath of military divorce or Federal Civil Service divorce, particularly when the member has long since retired?  First, a clarification order must be obtained and a new application submitted to DFAS or OPM, as it applies, so that the former spouse can begin to receive the monthly payments that rightfully have been theirs all along.  Unfortunately, neither DFAS nor OPM will calculate arrears or pay arrears on payments long since overdue.

Presuming the divorce decree or accompanying domestic relations order named the military servicemember or civil servant as "constructive trustee" for receipt and transfer of payments due to the former spouse, relief is available.  Texas case law has established that the member named "constructive trustee" owes a fiduciary duty to the former spouse to see that he or she receives payment¹.  The former spouse can bring suit for "breach of fiduciary duty²." 

The Civil Practices and Remedies Code establishes that a suit for breach of fiduciary duty carries a four year statute of limitations³.   Thus, the former spouse can sue for recoupment of payments the servicemember or civil servant received, but never transferred, for up to four years from the date of filing the lawsuit for breach of fiduciary duty⁴. 

Designation as "constructive trustee" and its implication in permitting a suit for breach of fiduciary duty with a four year statute of limitations is a distinction of huge importance.  Otherwise, and what many opposing attorneys will try to argue, is that the two year statute of limitations under the Texas Family Code governs⁵.  A former spouse and his or her attorney should not bite on that.  Failing to file and argue the correct cause of action (i.e. breach of fiduciary duty with a four year statute of limitation instead of enforcement of a property division with a two year statute of limitation) can cut in half the relief available to the former spouse.  Speak with a qualified military divorce or Federal Civil Service divorce attorney for more information.

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

___________________________

Note¹:  See Preston v. Preston, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 7376 at *5-6 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, Aug. 18, 2004, no pet.) (memo op.).

Note²:  Id.

Note³:  Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Sec. 16.004(a)(5).

Note⁴:  See Preston v. Preston, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 7376 at *5-6.

Note⁵:  Tex. Fam. Code Sec. 9.003.

It happens all too often that the Defense Finance & Accounting Service (DFAS) will reject a former spouse's application for the share of military retired pay awarded to him or her in a military divorce.  This occurs when the award expression in the divorce decree, or domestic relations order (DRO) that often complements the decree, is missing one or more pieces of information DFAS needs to compute the former spouse's share.  The bad news typically arrives when DFAS sends the former spouse a letter informing that he or she needs to get the court to issue a clarification order that provides the missing information.

We can help.   The requirements proper division of military retired pay in divorce are detailed in Dep't of Defense Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, Volume 7B, Chapter 29, Former Spouse Payments From Retired Pay.  We understand the DODFMR's labyrinth of requirements, which can be very confusing to those who have never done a military divorce or only infrequently deal with the subject matter.  Let us "break the code" for you.

For a former spouse client, we'll determine the error, obtain the missing information, and work with either the ex-spouse or their attorney to get a clarification order entered with the court.  As needed, we prepare and re-submit the former spouse application for retired pay to DFAS (i.e. re-application is necessary if more than 90 days has elapsed since the initial application).

We also provide support services to other attorneys as they endeavor to do the scope of work described above for their client.  In these cases, we work behind the scenes to help other attorneys succeed. 

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm provides a spectrum of family law-related services to clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States and throughout the world.  The firms also provides Wills and Estates and Probate services.

Our firm has helped many military or Federal Civil Service member who are PCS or deployed overseas handle an array of family law matters such as:

• Military divorce
• Federal Civil Service divorce 
• Modification of child custody, visitation or child support
• Enforcement of conservatorship or access provisions (e.g. right to receive information from the other conservator about the well-being and activities of the child or right to call/Skype/FaceTime, etc., with the child)
• Obtain duration temporary orders for the deployed military member to designate a third party (e.g. aunt/uncle or grandparent) to exercise the deployed member's visitation for the of the deployment

Our firm's ability to service and counsel client needs is global.  We've helped military or Federal Civil Service clients who are either PCS, deployed to, or with issues tied to assignment in countries such as:

• Afghanistan
• Germany
• Honduras
• Italy
• Japan
• Mexico
• South Korea
• United Arab Emirates

Our firm's approach is unique, in ways as follows:

• We use a cloud-based case management system that provides the client with 24/7 access to all case-related documents; an ability to upload documents to the system in a secure environment; an ability to view a calendar of scheduled events; and, an ability to communicate securely via an inter-system messaging capability.
• We routinely schedule Skype sessions with overseas clients because we understand that high-quality, interactive "face-to-face" communication between the attorney and client is important.
• We routinely have overseas clients appear at mediation or trial remotely via Skype to facilitate their "personal presence" at these critical events.

If you are a military or Federal Civil Service member who is PCS or deployed overseas and looking for a family law firm to help with an issue in the courts of Bexar and surrounding counties, you are invited to send us a consultation request through our website to arrange a free consult.  We'll be glad to set up a convenient time to Skype with you to learn more about your situation, answer questions, and discuss strategies for a way forward.

Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and the founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC.  The firm helps clients in the greater San Antonio region, across the United States, and globally with family-law related matters the courts of Bexar and surrounding counties.

First, you should know that the former spouse's military retired pay payments stop when the servicemember dies.  Former spouse SBP is a purchased annuity that, if available, can replace that stream of payments.  To have former spouse SBP protection, it must have been ordered as part of your decree and applied for in a timely manner. 

There are two scenarios where former spouse SBP cannot be awarded as part of a military divorce, as follows:

1. Spouse SPB was not elected by the servicemember at time of retirement (which would have required the spouse's consent); and,
2. Former spouse SBP was awarded to a prior spouse in a prior divorce; the annuity cannot be split or awarded twice.  The early bird gets the whole worm.

You--and your divorce attorney--should know that any attempt to have the court order the servicemember to make the former spouse the beneficiary of the servicemember's SGLI or VGLI life insurance policies is unenforceable.  That fact has been established in both Federal law and a U.S. Supreme Court decision.  Given that fact, asking the court to order the servicemember to provide a commercial insurance policy or annuity are the best options to protect the former spouse's financial security after the servicemember dies and former spouse military retired pay stops. 

For more information about former spouse SBP, speak with a qualified military divorce attorney. 

Author Jim Cramp is a retired active duty colonel and founder and principal attorney at the Cramp Law Firm, PLLC, serving clients in throughout the greater San Antonio region, across the United States, and globally.

Note:  For attorneys, see 38 U.S.C. Sec. 1970(g) and Ridgway v. Ridgway, 454 U.S. 46 (1981).