Leonard Gary Cylear v. Rita A. Johnson-Cylear

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, affirmed the challenged portions of a final divorce decree dividing the parties’ marital estate. The court held that no binding agreement required sale of the marital residence, that the trial court did not divest Leonard Cylear of separate property, and that the disproportionate division of community property was not an abuse of discretion. The court also held that the jury’s improperly answered conditional constructive-fraud damages question was immaterial.

Holdings

1. The alleged agreement did not bind the trial court or prevent Rita from repudiating an agreement to sell the Camp Verde Property before rendition of the divorce decree. The temporary orders and an unsigned Rule 11 document did not establish an enforceable section 7.006 agreement, and the listing agreement did not make the alleged sale agreement binding under another rule of law.
2. The appellate complaint was not preserved, and the record in any event showed that the trial court did not divest Leonard of his separate-property interest in the Lockheed Martin account. The court awarded Leonard the entire account, including his separate-property portion and the community portion.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding Rita a disproportionate share of the community estate. A no-fault divorce does not preclude the trial court from considering marital fault, along with other relevant factors, in making a just-and-right property division.
4. Leonard's fourth issue presented nothing for appellate review because his brief stated the issue but supplied no supporting argument or authorities.
5. The trial court properly disregarded the jury's $347,000 answer because the predicate condition for answering the damages question was not met. The answer was an immaterial voluntary finding and did not conflict with the jury's affirmative finding that Leonard's transfers, gifts, or expenditures were fair.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court improperly awarded the Camp Verde Property to Rita despite an alleged binding agreement incident to divorce requiring its sale.
2. Whether the trial court improperly divested Leonard of separate property by awarding Rita 100% of a Lockheed Martin savings account.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by awarding Rita a disproportionate share of the community estate after the jury granted the divorce without regard to fault.
4. Whether Leonard's inadequately briefed challenge to orders entered without notice presented a reviewable appellate issue.
5. Whether the trial court improperly disregarded the jury's conditional finding that Leonard depleted the community estate by $347,000 through transfers, gifts, or expenditures.

Disposition

affirmed