Linda Smith v. John Burt, 528 S.W.3d 144

Linda Smith (formerly Linda Burt) and John Burt divorced in 1990; the decree awarded Smith $391/month of Burt’s military retirement and “50% of any and all cost-of-living-related increases” beginning October 31, 1990.
In 2000 Smith sought clarification/enforcement of her COLA share; a 2002 court order clarified she was entitled to $391/month plus 50% of COLAs and awarded past-due COLA judgment of $7,628 (some earlier amounts were time-barred).
Smith later sued (2008) to enforce the 2002 order and collect COLA payments from 2003–2008 and to hold Burt in contempt for failing to pay the 2002 judgment; an associate judge ruled for Smith, but later the trial court granted relief to Burt after he filed a bill of review.
The trial court concluded Smith was not entitled to the accumulated COLA and found Burt had overpaid Smith; Smith appealed the denial of her motion to clarify and enforce.
The Court of Appeals held the 1990 decree plus the 2002 clarification awarded Smith 50% of the accumulated COLA to which Burt becomes entitled, reversed the trial court’s denial, and remanded for further proceedings to calculate amounts and address enforcement and fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Smith is entitled to 50% of the accumulated COLA increases to which Burt becomes entitled (i.e., share of past and future COLAs)	Smith: decree and 2002 order give her 50% of cost-of-living-related increases; that includes accumulated COLA amounts Burt becomes entitled to receive	Burt: Smith received a fixed $391/month; awarding accumulated COLA converts the award into a percentage and impermissibly modifies the property division	Court: Affirmed Smith’s entitlement to $391/month plus 50% of any and all COLA increases Burt becomes entitled to (including accumulated COLA); reversed trial court and remanded for calculation/enforcement

Gainous v. Gainous, 219 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (standards for enforcement/clarification of divorce decree)
In re Marriage of McDonald, 118 S.W.3d 829 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2003) (abuse-of-discretion review on enforcement/clarification)
Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. 2004) (definition of abuse of discretion)
In re Cerberus Capital Mgmt. L.P., 164 S.W.3d 379 (Tex. 2005) (abuse of discretion when law not correctly applied)
BMC Software Belgium, N.V. v. Marchand, 83 S.W.3d 789 (Tex. 2002) (review of conclusions of law de novo)
Hagen v. Hagen, 282 S.W.3d 899 (Tex. 2009) (interpretation of divorce decrees; ambiguity rules)