in the Matter of the Marriage of Lisa Mozley and William Mozley, and in the Interest of F.M., a Child
06-16-00004-CV
| Tex. App. | Aug 12, 2016Background
- Lisa and William “Rick” Mozley married in 1985, had two children, and accumulated significant community assets (home, ranch, Rick’s partnership interest and 401(k), Lisa’s teaching retirement, inherited oil/royalty interests).
- Rick admitted to at least two extramarital affairs (one beginning Feb. 2014 with “Mollie”); Lisa had an earlier affair as well. Lisa moved out after discovering Rick’s affair and later filed for divorce.
- After a three-day trial with voluminous exhibits, the Dallas County trial court granted divorce on the ground of insupportability, awarded each party separate property, divided community property proportionately, and denied Lisa spousal maintenance.
- Lisa appealed, arguing the trial court should have granted divorce on adultery, awarded her a disproportionate share of community property and spousal maintenance based on Rick’s fault and higher earning capacity, and that the court’s delay in ruling was unreasonable.
- The reporter’s record on appeal was incomplete (many exhibits and filings omitted); Lisa did not request a complete reporter’s record or include required statements for a partial record.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion in (1) granting divorce on insupportability, (2) the property division and denial of spousal maintenance, and (3) the trial court’s timing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lisa) | Defendant's Argument (Rick) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper ground for divorce | Court should grant divorce on adultery because Rick admitted affairs and showed no remorse | Trial court may grant divorce on insupportability; adultery is discretionary | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion to base divorce on insupportability |
| Consideration of fault in property division | Lisa (innocent spouse) should receive disproportionate share due to Rick’s adultery | Fault is discretionary; both spouses had extramarital conduct; court may divide community estate as just and right | Affirmed: no abuse of discretion in proportionate division; record does not show unjust/inequitable split |
| Spousal maintenance eligibility | Lisa lacks sufficient property and earning ability; Rick’s higher earning capacity warrants maintenance | Trial court found no basis to order maintenance under statutory standards | Affirmed: trial court within discretion to deny maintenance; Lisa failed to prove entitlement |
| Delay in ruling and entry of judgment | Delay (2 months to notify ruling; 4 months to enter judgment) was unreasonable and prejudiced consideration of adultery | Delay reasonable given three-day complex trial and post-trial motions; parties contributed to delay | Affirmed: delay not shown unreasonable or harmful; any later delay attributed to parties’ filings |
Key Cases Cited
- Murff v. Murff, 615 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1981) (abuse-of-discretion review of family-court matters)
- Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. 1985) (definition of abuse of discretion)
- Schafer v. Conner, 813 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. 1991) (presumption that omitted record supports trial court when appellant fails to provide complete record)
- Tull v. Tull, 159 S.W.3d 758 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005) (requirements and consequences for partial reporter's record)
- Lloyd’s of London v. Walker, 716 S.W.2d 99 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1986) (delay between trial and judgment may be unreasonable where extreme; burden on appellant to show unreasonableness and harm)
- Clay v. Clay, 550 S.W.2d 730 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1977) (insupportability is discretionary and does not compel court to grant divorce on fault grounds)