Matthew David Isam v. Alyssa Nicole Isam
03-23-00299-CV
| Tex. App. | Apr 25, 2025Background
- Alyssa Isam filed for divorce from Matthew Isam and sought termination of his parental rights to their four children.
- Matthew appeared pro se initially, but failed to appear at the trial; default divorce and parental termination were granted.
- Alyssa alleged Matthew repeatedly failed to support the children financially or emotionally, engaged in drug use and criminal conduct, and was abusive.
- The children’s guardian ad litem and amicus attorney recommended limited or no contact between Matthew and the children, based on concerns for their safety and welfare.
- The trial court terminated Matthew’s parental rights and divided the community estate, awarding most assets and debts according to possession but without valuation evidence.
- Matthew appealed, arguing the property division was unsupported by evidence and the termination of parental rights was not supported by clear and convincing evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Just and Right Division of Community Estate | Division proposed was fair, based on what each party had | Insufficient evidence on estate value; improper division | Division reversed and remanded; no supporting evidence |
| Termination of Parental Rights | Met statutory grounds: endangerment, non-support, abandonment | No clear and convincing evidence for termination | Termination order affirmed; evidence was sufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard for reviewing legal sufficiency of evidence)
- In re J.O.A., 283 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2009) (illegal narcotics use can constitute endangering conduct)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (evidence on predicate ground can support best-interest finding)
- Bradshaw v. Bradshaw, 555 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. 2018) (trial court’s broad discretion in property division)
- In re N.G., 577 S.W.3d 230 (Tex. 2019) (requirement for meaningful review of termination on endangerment grounds)
- In re H.R.M., 209 S.W.3d 105 (Tex. 2006) (appellate deference to trial court's credibility findings)
