the Estate of Francis W. Sinatra Jr. v. Cynthia Sinatra
13-14-00565-CV
| Tex. App. | Mar 5, 2015Background
- Francis W. Sinatra challenged Cynthia Sinatra’s informal marriage claim and related property division after a 2001 divorce.
- The trial court ruled there was an informal marriage; proceedings then addressed property, trusts, and support.
- Frank’s assets included a substantial inheritance via the Francis W. Sinatra Trust, with complex intercompany holdings.
- Cynthia stipulated to Frank’s separate-property items under the 2001 decree but later withdrew that stipulation.
- Frank argued the trust and assets remained his separate property and that mischaracterization created a community estate.
- The appellate brief requests reversal of the common-law marriage finding and recovery of Frank’s separate-property status.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an informal marriage existed | Sinatra argues there was no mutual agreement to marry, no Texas cohabitation, and no outward holding out | Sinatra contends the three elements were proven by evidence of agreement, cohabitation, and holding out | No informal marriage established; trial court abused discretion on the three elements |
| Characterization of Hensal Road home and trust assets | Sinatra asserts the home and trust assets were his separate property and mischaracterization created community property | Sinatra contends withdrawal of stipulations and tracing support separate-property status | Court erred in characterizing Frank’s assets as community property; trust remains separate property |
| Equalization cash/hidden assets finding | Sinatra contends there was no proven $1,000,000 unspent cash; evidence does not support equalization | Sinatra argues the trial court could justify equalization based on perceived remaining community funds | No legally/factually sufficient evidence for $1,000,000 unspent cash; equalization error |
| Spousal maintenance award | Sinatra asserts no diligence by Cynthia and no statutory basis for $5,000 monthly maintenance | Sinatra acknowledges premised on maintenance statute but argues it applies given circumstances | Maintenance award vacated as unsupported by statutory prerequisites or evidence |
| Overall just and right division | Sinatra claims division was unjust, disproportionate, and based on mischaracterization | Sinatra contends the court’s discretion allowed balance with the found community property | Division not just and right due to mischaracterization and unsupported equalization |
Key Cases Cited
- Burden v. Burden, 420 S.W.3d 305 (Tex.App.–Texarkana 2013) (establishes three-element burden for informal marriage; evidence must show mutual agreement)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (legal/factual sufficiency standard in review of trial court decisions)
- Moroch v. Collins, 174 S.W.3d 849 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2005) (standard for abuse of discretion; sufficiency as factor in discretion)
- Welder v. Welder, 794 S.W.2d 420 (Tex.App.–Corpus Christi 1990) (tracing separate vs community property; deposits do not convert identity)
- Winfield v. Renfro, 621 S.W.2d 640 (Tex.App.–Houston [1 Dist.] 1991) (time-variance issues in common-law marriage proofs)
- Zagorski v. Zagorski, 116 S.W.3d 309 (Tex.App.–Houston [14 Dist.] 2003) (tracing and characterization of property; community vs separate)
- Eggemeyer v. Eggemeyer, 554 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. 1977) (required characterization framework for community vs separate property)
- Estate of Hanau v. Hanau, 730 S.W.2d 663 (Tex. 1987) (traceable separate property; inception of title standard)