law-divorce-reimbursement-claim | separate and community property | community property presumption in divorce
suit | appellate decisions on disputed property division in divorce suits |
The statute providing for claims based on economic contribution has recently been repealed. Tex. Fam. Code
Ann. § 3.403, repealed by Act of May 29, 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., ch. 768, § 11(3), 2009 Tex. Gen. Laws 1950, 1953
(eff. Sept. 1, 2009)
REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM AGAINST ANOTHER MARITAL ESTATE
A party may bring a claim for reimbursement of payments by one marital estate to satisfy
unsecured liabilities of another marital estate. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 3.408(b)(1) (Vernon 2007).
“The right of reimbursement is not an interest in property or an enforceable debt, per se, but an equitable right
which arises upon dissolution of the marriage . . . ." Vallone, 644 S.W.2d at 458-59. “[T]he payment by one
marital estate of the debt of another creates a prima facie right of reimbursement." Penick v. Penick, 783 S.W.2d
194, 196 (Tex. 1988).
Knight v. Knight (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 29, 2009)(Hedges)
(divorce property division, reimbursement claim)
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED & REMANDED IN PART: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Frost
14-08-00424-CV Monica Faye Knight v. Bobby Wayne Knight
Appeal from 246th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Jim York
At trial, Bobby testified that he took out a loan against his truck to pay off his separate property judgment debt.[8]
He admitted that although Monica had not contributed to the debt, he used community property funds to extinguish
it. In the decree and its findings and conclusions, the court characterized the truck as part of the community estate
subject to division but made no mention of the community funds used to pay off the debt.
The undisputed evidence shows that Bobby's separate property judgment was paid by community property
funds. We therefore conclude that the trial court's refusal to reimburse the community for one-half of the
community funds used to pay Bobby's separate property judgment debt was unsupported by the evidence and an
abuse of discretion. See Zieba v. Martin, 928 S.W.2d 782, 790 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, no pet.).
CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE