Brown v. Wokocha
526 S.W.3d 504
Tex. App.2017Background
- Brown and Wokocha married in April 2004 and separated in September 2011; Brown filed for divorce in August 2013 and Wokocha counterclaimed with fiduciary and fraud claims.
- Wokocha amended to include fraudulent-transfer, emotional-distress, and civil-conspiracy claims, and added Brown’s adult daughters and several business entities as co-respondents.
- Daughters moved for summary judgment and the trial court granted, after which the case went to trial to the bench.
- The final divorce decree divided the marital estate; no explicit equal/disproportionate allocation or asset-valuations were stated in the decree, and no findings of fact were included in the record.
- Brown appealed arguing misclassification of assets as community property, an excessive disproportionate division, and improper attorney’s-fees awards to a lawyer who represented third-party defendants; the court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
- Appellate record is limited because Brown requested only a partial record under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disproportionate division of community property | Brown | Wokocha | No clear abuse; lack of findings prevents review of amounts |
| Classification of life-insurance policies and entities as community property | Brown | Wokocha | Classification not reversible absent material effect; de minimis |
| Attorney’s fees for Okorafor representing third-party defendants | Brown | Wokocha | No authority to award fees from marital estate to third-party-defendant counsel |
Key Cases Cited
- Barras v. Barras, 396 S.W.3d 154 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2013) (abuse of discretion standard for property division; evidence-supported)
- Murff v. Murff, 615 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1981) (trial court broad discretion in dividing marital property)
- Wells v. Wells, 251 S.W.3d 834 (Tex. App.-Eastland 2008) (findings of fact required to assess division; no presumption)
- Hallum v. Hallum, 2010 WL 4910232 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (mem. op.; absence of findings affects review)
- Funderburgh v. Funderburgh, 2010 WL 2982906 (Tex. App.-Tyler 2010) (mem. op.; findings of fact required for value assessment)
- Robles v. Robles, 965 S.W.2d 605 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1998) (mischaracterization of property reversible only if material)
- Tate v. Tate, 55 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. App.-El Paso 2000) (mischaracterization must be material to division)
- Humphrey v. Humphrey, 593 S.W.2d 824 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1980) (harmless error if division is equitable)
- Vasudevan v. Vasudevan, 2015 WL 4774569 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2015) (review hinges on trial findings; de minimis presumption)