Tuesday, March 29, 2022

Notable Tax Takeaways from President Biden’s Budget

On March 28, 2022, President Joe Biden released his FY 2023 Budget of the U.S. Government (the “Budget”).[1] In a statement regarding the Budget, President Biden stated the following:

My Administration is on track to reduce the federal deficit by more than $1.3 trillion this year . . . We spent less money than the last Administration and got better results: strong economic growth, which has increased revenues and allowed us to responsibly scale back emergency spending. My budget will continue that progress, further reducing the deficit by continuing to support the economic growth that has increased revenues and ensuring that billionaires and large corporations pay their fair share.[2]

Notably, President Biden’s pursuit of a $1.3 trillion reduction to the federal deficit and the support of “economic growth” are largely based on proposed changes to the current tax system—changes that will not just affect the millionaires and billionaires and multinational corporations. For a complete copy of President Biden’s FY 2023 Budget, click here. A high-level summary of the proposed tax changes is outlined below.

A “Fairer Tax System”

Under the title, “Putting the National on a Sound Fiscal and Economic Course,” the Budget states that the proposed investments will be “more than paid for through reforms that would create a fairer tax system.”[3] The three major reforms are reproduced below:

Proposes a New Minimum Tax on Billionaires. The tax code currently offers special treatment for the types of income that wealthy people enjoy. This special treatment, combined with sophisticated tax planning and giant loopholes, allows many of the very wealthiest people in the world to end up paying a lower tax rate on their full income than many middle-class households. To finally address this glaring problem, the Budget includes a 20 percent minimum tax on multi-millionaires and billionaires who so often pay indefensibly low tax rates. This minimum tax would apply only to the wealthiest 0.01 percent of households—those with more than $100 million—and over half the revenue would come from billionaires alone.

Ensures Corporations Pay Their Fair Share. The Budget also includes an increase to the rate that corporations pay in taxes on their profits. Corporations received an enormous tax break in 2017. While their profits have soared, their investment in the economy did not. Those tax breaks did not trickle down to workers or consumers. Instead of allowing some of the most profitable corporations in the world to avoid paying their fair share, the Budget would raise the corporate tax rate to 28 percent, still well below the 35 percent rate that prevailed for most of the last several decades. This increase is complemented by other changes to the corporate tax code that would incentivize job creation and investment in the United States and ensure that large corporations pay their fair share.

Prevents Multinational Corporations from Using Tax Havens to Game the System. For decades, American workers and taxpayers have paid the price for a tax system that has rewarded multinational corporations for shipping jobs and profits overseas. Last year, the Administration rallied more than 130 countries to agree to a global minimum tax that will ensure that profitable corporations pay their fair share and incentivizes U.S. multinationals to create jobs and invest in the United States. The Budget contains additional measures to ensure that multinationals operating in the United States cannot use tax havens to undercut the global minimum.[4]

The “Billionaire Minimum Income Tax” (“BMIT”) has certainly attracted much news coverage. Outside of the fact that the proposed income tax sets a mandatory minimum tax for one, albeit small, segment of U.S. taxpayers, the BMIT also incorporates the taxation of unrealized capital gains. The BMIT proposal begs several questions, including (1) whether the BMIT is supported by the Sixteenth Amendment, and (2) how the Internal Revenue Service (that is already operating with a hand tied behind its back) would administer the BMIT (e.g., valuing unrealized capital gains particularly related to non-public investments). Further, corporations will also feel the sting through a proposed increase to the corporate tax from 21% to 28%—a veritable “middle ground” between the 21% tax rate of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”) and the pre-TCJA tax rate of 35%.

Additional Tax Proposals

However, the proposed tax changes do not stop there. According to Table S-6, Mandatory and Receipt Proposals, the Budget envisions more changes, such as:

  • Strengthening taxation of high-income taxpayers:
    • Increasing the top marginal income tax rate for high earners (i.e., increasing the top individual tax bracket to 39.6%);
    • Reforming the taxation of capital income;
  • Modifying estate and gift taxation:
    • Modifying income, estate, and gift tax rules for certain grantor trusts;
    • Requiring consistent valuation of promissory notes;
    • Improving tax administration for trusts and decedents’ estates;
    • Limiting duration of generation-skipping transfer tax exemption;
  • Closing loopholes:
    • Taxing carried (profits) interests as ordinary income;
    • Repealing deferral of gain from like-kind exchanges;
    • Requiring 100 percent recapture of depreciation deductions as ordinary income for certain depreciable real property;
    • Limiting a partner’s deduction in certain syndicated conservation easement transactions;
    • Extending the period for assessment of tax for certain Qualified Opportunity Fund investors;
    • Establishing an untaxed income account regime for certain small insurance companies;
    • Expanding pro rata interest expense disallowance for business-owned life insurance;
    • Correcting drafting errors in the taxation of insurance companies under the TCJA; and
    • Defining the term “ultimate purchaser” for purposes of diesel fuel exportation.[5]

Investment in the Department of the Treasury

President Biden’s Budget also requests increased investment in the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service. Of note, the Budget states, in part, the following:

[T]he agency’s funding and staffing levels have not kept pace with its expanding scope. To ensure that taxpayers receive the highest quality customer service and that all Americans are treated fairly by the U.S. tax system, the Budget provides a total of $14.1 billion for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), $2.2 billion, or 18 percent, above the 2021 enacted level. This includes an increase of $798 million to improve the taxpayer experience and expand customer service outreach to underserved communities and the taxpaying public at large. The Budget also provides $310 million for IRS Business Systems Modernization, which is 39 percent above the 2021 enacted level, to accelerate the development of new digital tools to enable better communication between taxpayers and the IRS. Increased funding for the IRS would also facilitate more effective oversight of high-income and corporate tax returns. . . .

The Budget provides $210 million for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, $83 million above the 2021 enacted level, to increase oversight of the financial sector, strengthen corporate accountability, and provide adequate support to law enforcement and investigative entities. . . .

The Budget provides $293 million for Treasury’s Departmental Offices, a 26-percent increase over the 2021 enacted level, to rebuild institutional capacity and strengthen the role of Treasury policy offices.[6]

Conclusion

The Budget certainly proposes multiple changes to the current federal tax system and enforcement agencies. While taxpayers (and tax practitioners) would generally benefit from increased investments in the Internal Revenue Service to help with administration, the proposed tax changes likely evoke polarizing viewpoints. At the end of the day, the Budget is a proposal and faces various hurdles in Congress, particularly in an election year.

 

Expert Tax Attorneys

Need help with tax issues? Contact us as soon as possible to discuss your rights and the ways we can assist in your tax planning or defenseWe handle all types of cases, including tax planning and defense. Schedule a Consultation Today!

[1] Budget of the U.S. Government (Fiscal Year 2023), The White House (Mar. 28, 2022), available at https://ift.tt/Lbsr3xe.

[2] Statement by President Joe Biden on the FY 2023 Budget, The White House (Mar. 28, 2022), available at https://ift.tt/v62Rqlb.

[3] Budget, at p. 35.

[4] Budget, at pp. 35-36.

[5] Budget, at p. 132.

[6] Budget, at pp. 97-98.

The post Notable Tax Takeaways from President Biden’s Budget appeared first on Freeman Law.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/APLbKdu
via Abogado Aly Website

Civ Pro: How to e-File in Texas

We often receive questions from pro se litigants about how to file their case documents electronically. This short guide will help you get started with e-filing in Texas without an attorney. Don’t forget to check out the other blog posts of the Civ Pro: The More You Know series for more information about Texas civil procedure for pro se litigants.

Where to e-file in Texas

  • eFileTexas.gov
    Statewide e-filing system powered by the Office of Court Administration. All e-filing in Texas is completed through this online system.

  • eFileTexas Self-Help Online Service
    Web portal that guides users through filling out and filing forms necessary for various cases with eFileTexas.gov.

Instructions for e-filing

FAQs about e-filing

e-Filing trainings and instructional videos

Further resources



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/XsF31la
via Abogado Aly Website

Why Go with the Collaborative Process in a Texas divorce?

Probably the most distinctive feature of a divorce or child custody case is the daily, back, and forth arguing and acrimony that is associated with a case. While it is not uncommon in any legal case for there to be a fair amount of back and forth between parties a divorce or child custody case tends to be especially bad in this regard. The issues at play in a case- child custody, property division, child support, and conservatorship issues- are all highly emotional and highly important to your everyday life. Most legal matters do not hit home as family law cases do. 

If you are looking for an option to eliminate or at least reduce the amount of arguing that occurs in your divorce case, then you may need to look no further than collaborative mediation. When it comes to finding out about new methods of approaching divorce cases to collaborate mediation is probably one of the most effective and innovative to come along in some time. It certainly offers you a different approach to how divorce can be handled. The reason why I think it is so innovative and effective is that it combines aspects of being family-centered, affordability, and effective all in one sitting. 

The downsides of divorce are many

It’s no secret that going through a divorce is not easy. The process itself is time-consuming. Remember that during your divorce case you will have the rest of your life to keep afloat, as well. Family, the school for the kids, extracurricular activities, church- the list goes on and on. These things cannot be “paused” because you are going through a divorce. They keep going whether you are prepared for it, or not. Divorce can certainly throw a wrench into your life outside of the case. Many times, you cannot pick up where you left off, either. 

Your finances may take a hit during the divorce, as well. Consider that there are costs over and above that of hiring an attorney when you sign up for a divorce. Court costs, filing costs, costs associated with social studies, expert witnesses, realtor costs to sell a home, etc. Most people going through a divorce choose, with good reason, to hire an attorney. These costs climb along with everything else in our inflation-addled world. Do not underestimate the impact of a divorce on your pocketbook. Even the household budget can be thrown out of flux when you consider that you are removing two incomes and inserting only one. 

The relationships between you and your children will be impacted. Sometimes the relationship with your kids will improve because of the divorce. In a situation where you are being denied visitation with your kids being able to gain court-ordered visitation with your children is a major plus. Something is better than nothing, as they would say. However, in other situations, your relationship with your kids may suffer because of a divorce. Having less time with your kids is the net result for many families. On top of that, children can sometimes place blame on you or your spouse because of the divorce. If that is your situation, then you may find out that you need to spend a great deal of time needed to repair that relationship once the divorce is over. 

On top of that, there are emotional aspects to a divorce that cannot be set to the side. The relationships with your family may become distressed regarding your going through a divorce. Imagine a situation where your parents are deeply hurt by your decision to get a divorce because they will not be able to spend as much time with their grandchildren as they are accustomed to. They may never understand your motivations. All they see are their grandchildren going to live in a place that is farther away from them. I can’t say that most families will go through stress like this, but some will. You never know how the family will react to divorce until you get through the case. Do you have adult children? These grown kids will typically react to divorce in a way where they choose sides because they have seen the issues in your marriage and can place blame on you or your spouse (or both).

Mediation offers a reprieve from the tedious and difficult divorce process

Fortunately, nearly every person in Texas who goes through a divorce has an opportunity to avoid a great deal of the negatives that we have discussed so far today. Mediation allows for you and your spouse to choose an experienced, third-party attorney (or former judge) to review your case with you and negotiate a settlement. Most of the time you will go to that attorney’s office and sit in separate rooms from your spouse. Your attorneys will review settlement proposals, make counter offers and hopefully reach a consensus that can eliminate the need to go to court for a judge to decide your case. Keep the power to chart your course by avoiding contested hearings or trials. 

Most family court judges that I am aware of requiring that you attend mediation at least twice- once before temporary orders hearings and once before a final trial. Many judges will take that a step further and require at least two good faith efforts to mediate your case before allowing you to enter the courtroom. This reflects the reality that judges understand that you and your spouse, no matter how upset you are with one another, are better equipped to reach a consensus on contested issues than he or she is. Additionally- courts are backed up like never before due to a host of issues including the pandemic. They are doing their best to dig themselves out of a hole. However, judges are more than happy to continually send you to mediation especially if you are getting closer to a settlement. 

Another great thing about divorce mediation is that it is private. In a divorce trial or hearing, there are limited opportunities to keep the proceedings private. Technically, almost anyone can walk into the courtroom and observe the proceedings. Mediation is private. Mediation allows the two of you to meet with a mediator in an environment that is relatively stress-free. Imagine the feeling of not having someone breathing down your neck, literally and metaphorically, during your case. That is one of the many benefits that both mediation and the collaborative divorce process provide its participants. 

Being able to make up your mind about the issues that your family is impacted by is a huge benefit of mediation. Do not underestimate just how much better positioned you and your spouse are to make decisions for your family versus a family court judge. There are subtleties in every family that cannot possibly be explored in significant enough detail even after a one- or two-day trial. The judge will get a fair impression of your family and your circumstances but even then, it is limited. You and your spouse know what matters most to your kids. Odds are good that you can look past your differences in most cases to settle on orders that work best for your family. The mediator is there to help you both see when you’re being unreasonable and when you are being reasonable in holding certain positions within your case. 

Collaborative mediation is a step in the direction of improving upon even the basic mediation process involved in most Texas divorces. When it comes to collaborative law in divorce cases, you are looking at a situation where you and your spouse are agreeing to set aside your differences and do what is best for your kids and both of you. It is looking ahead to the future rather than getting bogged down in the murky details of a divorce as it is ongoing. Instead of getting lost in the trees why not soar above them and hang out in the clouds? If this is the vantage point that you prefer in a divorce, then a collaborative divorce may be just what you need. 

Collaborative divorces are simpler

Imagine being able to sit down and discuss brass tacks with your spouse immediately in your divorce. While it is true that in any divorce you can immediately do that, the fact is that most spouses piddle away their time in a divorce in many regards. Once you hit a wall with informal negotiations many people simply assume that there is no chance of settling a case. At that point, you would just be waiting for mediation. That’s not the worst strategy in the world. However, it does assume that you have no better options. I would present to you today that a collaborative divorce with mediation is the better option that you can and should be seeking. 

Collaborative law is a new development in the general field of family law. If both you and your spouse agree to participate in the collaborative law process, then you can reap the benefits of that process almost immediately. A written agreement goes into place after being signed off on by you and your spouse. You would hire separate attorneys who would agree to represent both of your interests as a team. The participation agreement between the two of your lawyers would be identical and would pledge the following information to one another.

First, you all would be going into this process with a respectful attitude towards one another. On a good faith basis, this makes a ton of sense. Negotiation is extremely difficult if you are being belligerent, nasty, or otherwise difficult with your spouse. Nobody is trying to tell you that you do not have valid concerns over your divorce. However, it is one thing to understand that your divorce is necessary, but it is another thing to be hostile to your spouse. It may feel good at the moment to act in this way, but rarely does it ever accomplish what you want it to. You may find that this attitude holds you back more than anything else in your entire case. 

Next, you and your spouse would agree to think about what matters to your spouse and hold that as something important to you, as well. This is a tough one, admittedly. If you are getting a divorce, it is likely to do there being a major disagreement between you and your spouse somewhere in your relationship. Or else, why would you be getting divorced in the first place? Along those same lines, it is easy to look past what your spouse “wants” as him or her being selfish or shortsighted. Divorce is a war, after all. Isn’t it appropriate to do whatever it takes to come out on top in that war? I would argue, no, there are certain actions that you should refrain from taking no matter how high the stakes are in your divorce. If you follow the Golden Rule, consider the position of your spouse in all things, and try to walk a mile in their shoes then you will almost certainly find yourself approaching the case from a much different vantage point. 

In a divorce, there is a process known as discovery. Discovery puts the two of you in a position where both of you submit requests for information- admissions to questions, documents, and things of this nature- and have up to thirty days to respond with either the information requested or valid objections to a specific request. The discovery process can take place throughout the case but most frequently occurs between a temporary order hearing and final orders mediation. This way you can obtain information about your spouse to gain an insight into their case and their preparations for a trial. Operating under the same information and evidence is crucial to being able to negotiate successfully for a conclusion to your case. 

Discovery works much of the time, but it can also be a royal pain to the rear-end. Often parties and their attorneys look to use discovery as a huge game of misdirection and time-wasting. Valid requests for information are often objected to almost daring the well-meaning party to request a hearing to present the issue to a judge. Only then will the party turn over the information. Other times, the amount of information submitted can be voluminous to a degree where it can cost you thousands of dollars simply to have your attorney review all of it. Killing you with kindness is another way to look at this. All in all, discovery can accomplish the objectives of you or your spouse but can delay your case substantially at the same time. 

Rather, a collaborative divorce invites and essentially demands that you and your spouse immediately and without the need for a request formally to turn over all relevant information, documents, and other material that could be relevant to your case. Doing so saves time, money, and effort. If you have something that you think is relevant to your divorce you should speak to your attorney about it first. Then if you all determine that it is relevant to the divorce you should turn it over to the other side. They will do the same with you. This will save you some time and money while providing the two of you with an opportunity to display the good sportsmanship necessary to effectuate a successful collaborative divorce.

Probably the most significant promise that the two of you would make in your collaborative divorce agreement would be to hold off on going to court unless necessary. For whatever reason, many people see the courts as a resource to be taken advantage of with frequency. This propensity to find yourself in front of a judge with regularity is not only expensive but is counterproductive in many cases. Rather than working together to get past your differences and resolve problems on your own, going to court punts the issues to a judge. While there is nothing wrong with this method it flies in the face of the objectives of a collaborative divorce. Unless you are getting a little uncomfortable with the negotiation process then you probably aren’t doing the collaborative divorce right.

All in all, collaborative divorces can work well for many different kinds of people. However, the only way that you can know with any degree of certainty that a collaborative divorce is right for you is if you contact an attorney to discuss the topic. Remember that a divorce is incredibly personal. So much so that you cannot rely upon a random blog post that you find on a family attorney’s website. The best chance you have to learn how a collaborative divorce may impact your life and family is to speak to an experienced family law attorney today. 

Questions about the material contained in today’s blog post? Contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan

If you have any questions about the material contained in today’s blog post, please do not hesitate to contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan. Our licensed family law attorneys offer free of charge consultations six days a week in person, over the phone, and via video. These consultations are a great way for you to learn more about the world of Texas family law as well as how your family’s circumstances may be impacted by the filing of a divorce or child custody case. 



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/zndkJYS
via Abogado Aly Website

What is the Law Regarding High Speed Chases in Texas

Unfortunately, far too many people are injured or killed every year in crashes related to high-speed police chases. According to a recent report, over the last 30 years, these crashes have killed more than 5,000 bystanders nationwide, and that number does not include the thousands of others who survived, but were seriously injured. In all, about two-thirds of the victims of high-speed police chase accidents are innocent third parties, who had nothing to do with the chase.

Federal Government Acknowledges Dangers of High Speed Police Chases

It’s possible these numbers are actually underestimated somewhat, since the data comes from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which compiles the information from police reports, which do not always make note of police chases. The numbers are still chilling, however, with a high percentage of the victims of these crashes being young children, teenagers, and the elderly. For its part, law enforcement agencies nationwide and the Department of Justice have acknowledged that high speed chases are extremely dangerous and present an extreme hazard to pedestrians and other motorists, and they have called on police agencies and officers to avoid them, but despite this, the problem persists. While police officers have a duty and a responsibility to protect innocent people from danger, quite often, their judgment goes by the wayside when the adrenaline is rushing through them during a high-speed chase.

While national standards have largely sought to curtail the practice of high-speed chases, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) seems to be going in the other direction. It not only allows for the high-speed chases, but it also allows troopers to shoot at vehicles that are fleeing. While DPS policies limit gun use to situations in which the officer believes a suspect will cause harm, they claim the occasional use of firearms from a vehicle is still sometimes necessary.

And while many police agencies around the nation have limited chases to only the most dangerous criminals and crimes, in Texas, there is virtually no distinction made between offenders who flee, which means they chase petty criminals just as rigorously as they do criminals who pose a serious danger to society. Their rationale is that anyone who attempts to evade law enforcement has committed a felony and endangered the public, and should be pursued.

DPS estimates that troopers engage in about 900 high speed chases per year, with many of them involving speeds of far greater than 100 mph. According to one study released in 2008, Texas state police are also far less likely to call off a chase once it has begun. Nationwide, police departments call off about nine percent of their chases at some point, whereas Texas DPS officers only called off three percent. That’s the equivalent of about 2.5 police chases a day, with only one being called off every couple of weeks.

High Speed Chase Accident Lawyer

Despite the constant public debate about the dangers to innocent bystanders by high speed police chases, the question of who is liable for any damages seems to be wide open and confusing for the victims and their loved ones, so if someone has been injured in a crash caused by a Texas high-speed police chase, you need a knowledgeable and experienced auto accident attorney to sort everything out and find you the compensation you need from whoever is responsible. The attorneys at Adame Garza LLP have the knowledge and experience you need to get what you deserve. Call us today for a free consultation to discuss your case.

var gform;gform||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,function(){gform.scriptsLoaded=!0}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,function(){gform.domLoaded=!0}),gform={domLoaded:!1,scriptsLoaded:!1,initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.domLoaded&&gform.scriptsLoaded?o():!gform.domLoaded&&gform.scriptsLoaded?window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,o):document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,o)},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,n,r,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,n,r,t)},addFilter:function(o,n,r,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,n,r,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,n){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,n)},removeFilter:function(o,n,r){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,n,r)},addHook:function(o,n,r,t,i){null==gform.hooks[o][n]&&(gform.hooks[o][n]=[]);var e=gform.hooks[o][n];null==i&&(i=n+”_”+e.length),gform.hooks[o][n].push({tag:i,callable:r,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(n,o,r){var t;if(r=Array.prototype.slice.call(r,1),null!=gform.hooks[n][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[n][o]).sort(function(o,n){return o.priority-n.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==n?t.apply(null,r):r[0]=t.apply(null,r)})),”filter”==n)return r[0]},removeHook:function(o,n,t,i){var r;null!=gform.hooks[o][n]&&(r=(r=gform.hooks[o][n]).filter(function(o,n,r){return!!(null!=i&&i!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][n]=r)}});

  • Free consultations.
    Send us a message and tell us about your case

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

document.getElementById( “ak_js_1” ).setAttribute( “value”, ( new Date() ).getTime() );

The post What is the Law Regarding High Speed Chases in Texas appeared first on Adame Garza LLP.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/CpDS7FJ
via Abogado Aly Website

Monday, March 28, 2022

Sufficiency and Separateness

Legally insufficient evidence was offered (under a clear-and-convincing proof standard, with case law that specifically addresses this evidentiary point) of an asset’s separate-property status when:

“The trial court .. questioned Moon concerning what evidence was presented at trial to show ‘that she had separate property before that got converted into the 51 percent community of Lakeside Vision.’ Moon did not cite any evidence but reiterated her contention that she would not have entered into the purchase if she had known it would be community property. The trial court noted the only evidence of tracing was Moon’s testimony regarding funds used for the purchase, but Moon and Scheef offered conflicting testimony as to the source of those funds, and Moon offered no evidence showing inception of title to the funds.”

Moon v. Scheef, No. 05-20-00105-CV (March 23, 2022) (mem. op.).

The post Sufficiency and Separateness appeared first on 600 Commerce.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/mLXtd4O
via Abogado Aly Website

Texas Jury Finds Same-Sex Couple Was Not Informally Married

Texas is among the states that still recognize informal marriage, sometimes called “common-law marriage.” A couple may establish an informal marriage by signing a document entitled “declaration of informal marriage.”  In the absence of a declaration, a party may also prove the existence of a Texas informal marriage through evidence that the couple agreed to be married, subsequently lived together as spouses in Texas, and represented to others that they were married.  Tex. Fam. Code § 2.401.  Although informal marriages are generally treated the same as formal marriages, the existence of an informal marriage can be far more difficult to prove.

Man Files for Divorce from Partner – No Marriage Found to Exist

A man, E.L., recently challenged a jury’s finding that he and his long-term same-sex partner, J.M., were not in an informal marriage. The parties started dating in 1997 and lived together from June 1998 until January 2017.  They were not formally married, and there was no evidence they had ever filed a declaration of informal marriage.  E.L. filed a lawsuit seeking a divorce from J.M.  The jury found the parties were not married.  E.L. appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence supporting that finding and that the evidence conclusively proved the parties were married.

The jury was asked to determine if the parties were married.

Conflicting Evidence Found in the Record

E.L. pointed to several pieces of evidence supporting an agreement between the parties to be married.  Two notarized domestic-partnership affidavits stated the parties had lived together in a “spouse-like relationship.”  Letters from J.M. stated his hopes for their future together and referred to the two of them as “Husbears.” They had lived together for about 19 years. J.M. had bought a ring for E.L. Additionally, J.M. gave E.L. stocks in his company, created a trust with E.L as trustee and beneficiary, named E.L. executor of his will, appointed E.L. his medical power of attorney and durable power of attorney, and designated him the guardian of his person and estate if a guardian was needed.

The appeals court found the evidence of informal marriage was not conclusive.  Additionally it conflicted with other evidence. J.M. testified the parties were not married and he did not consider E.L. to be his husband.  J.M. also testified that E.L. had repeatedly suggested marriage, but that he had been clear he would never marry E.L. Additionally, both parties listed themselves as single on their tax returns.

Appeals Court Upholds Jury’s Findings

The appeals court found there was conflicting evidence and noted that it is generally the factfinder’s responsibility to resolve conflicting evidence.  When a party appeals based on factual sufficiency, the appeals court will only set aside the verdict “contrary to the overwhelming weight and preponderance of the evidence. . .” Cain v. Bain. The appeals court found factually sufficient evidence supporting the finding. Because there was sufficient evidence supporting the finding as to the first element, the appeals court did not need to address the other informal marriage elements.

The appeals court similarly rejected E.L.’s argument that there was conclusive evidence supporting each of the informal marriage evidence.

The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decree.

Informal Marriages Can Require Extensive Proof – Call McClure Law Group to Help Protect Your Rights

Because same-sex couples were unable to legally marry for so long, many long-term couples may have complex circumstances with regard to informal marriages. If you anticipate separating from a long-term partner, an experienced Texas divorce attorney can advise you on your rights, including informal marriage and the potential need for a divorce.  Call McClure Law Group at 214.692.8200 to set up a consultation.

 



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/x7iFpGK
via Abogado Aly Website

COVID insurance

Making an Erie guess about Louisiana insurance law, the Fifth Circuit held: “Consistent with our decision in Terry Black’s, and the decisions of the unanimous circuit courts, we conclude, pursuant to Louisiana law, that losses caused by civil authority orders closing nonessential businesses in response to the COVID-19 pandemic do not fall within the meaning of ‘direct physical loss of or damage to property.’” Q Clothier v. Twin City Fire Ins., No. 21-30278 (March 22, 2022).

The post COVID insurance appeared first on 600 Camp.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/mBr4xhv
via Abogado Aly Website