407 S.W.3d 927
Tex. App.2013Background
- Divorce in 2006: Michelle awarded judgments totaling $38,500 with 6% annual interest.
- Post-divorce, Robert conveyed five tracts (approximately 39, 23, 4.232, 3, and 2.232 acres) to his two sons via special warranty deeds.
- Michelle and her counsel pursued collection; discovery revealed transfers to the sons but limited documentary support.
- January 2012 trial: Troy and Travis did not appear; Michelle proved transfers and lack of transactional records; Robert offered limited financials and claimed $82,000 received from sons.
- Trial court awarded Michelle a money judgment of $52,000 plus fees and declined to set aside the conveyances; conspiracy claims against the sons were dismissed.
- On appeal, Michelle contends the relief sought under UFTA §24.008(b) (levy execution on transferred assets) was foregone in favor of a money judgment; issue also raised about lack of findings of fact and conclusions of law; court reverses in part and remands to consider levy execution under §24.008(b).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether money judgment was proper relief under UFTA | Arriaga sought levy on transferred properties under §24.008(b) | Cartmill contends money judgment was proper relief | Yes, money judgment improper; remanded for levy execution under §24.008(b) |
| Whether the lack of findings of fact and conclusions of law was harmful error | Arriaga requested findings; needed to understand basis for relief | Cartmill argues findings would clarify, but not necessarily change outcome | Findings/ conclusions were immaterial to the judgment; court proceeds with issue 1 on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Cherne Indus., Inc. v. Magallanes, 763 S.W.2d 768 (Tex. 1989) (mandatory findings when properly requested; harm presumption)
- Tenery v. Tenery, 932 S.W.2d 29 (Tex. 1996) (harm presumed if findings omitted; per curiam)
- Esse v. Empire Energy III, Ltd., 333 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (liability under 24.006(a) does not require proof of intent)
- Metra United Escalante, L.P. v. Lynd Co., 158 S.W.3d 535 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004) (definition of reasonably equivalent value)
- NXS Constr., Inc., 387 S.W.3d 74 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2012) (UFTA remedies; avoid/attach; levy on transferred assets)
- Corpus v. Arriaga, 294 S.W.3d 629 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (remand for levied execution on real property under §24.008(b))