In the Interest of A.L.S., M.B.S., B.P.S. and F.J.S.
338 S.W.3d 59
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- In 1985, Brown and Stackhouse divorced; Stackhouse was ordered to pay $400/month child support and Brown to provide medical insurance.
- March 14, 1990 modification increased support to $565/month for four children with a $158/month medical-support add-on payable to Brown.
- October 1990 judgment nunc pro tunc adjusted child support but left medical-support terms largely unchanged; it later became contentious.
- 2006–2007 the OAG pursued IV-D services; an administrative writ of withholding was issued against Stackhouse’s wages by HISD.
- 2009 trial court awarded Brown $1,756.87 in child-support arrears and $0 medical-support arrears, with post-judgment interest; Brown appealed.
- The court later remanded to determine medical-support arrearage and pre-judgment interest; the remainder of the judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arrearage amount sufficiency | Brown contends evidence supports more arrears than $1,756.87. | Stackhouse maintains the amount is correct based on his payments and records. | The court upheld the $1,756.87 child-support arrearage; not an abuse of discretion. |
| Pre-judgment interest on arrearage | Brown argues pre-judgment interest should be awarded and calculated. | Stackhouse argues interest calculation was improper or untimely. | The court held that pre-judgment interest must be awarded; trial court erred in not granting it. |
| Medical-support arrearage | Brown seeks medical-support arrearages consistent with the 1990 order. | Stackhouse claims Brown’s failure to obtain insurance extinguished his medical obligation and seeks offset. | The court held the trial court abused its discretion by finding no medical-arrearage and remanded to determine amount owed. |
| Attorney's fees | Brown seeks attorney’s fees under §157.167. | Brown failed to prove reasonable attorney’s fees incurred. | The court ruled there was no entitlement to attorney’s fees due to lack of evidence; zero award appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Worford v. Stamper, 801 S.W.2d 108 (Tex. 1990) (abuse-of-discretion standard in child-support matters)
- Beck v. Walker, 154 S.W.3d 895 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.) (sufficiency of evidence in arrearage determinations; offsets not allowed absent statute)
- Chenault v. Banks, 296 S.W.3d 186 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (arrearage interest must be included; trial court as scrivener for calculation)
- In re M.C.R., 55 S.W.3d 104 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, no pet.) (support arrearage interest calculation principles)
- Lewis v. Lewis, 853 S.W.2d 850 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, no writ) (principles on calculating accrued interest in arrearages)