Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re A.D.C.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Eleventh District

March 29, 2019

IN THE INTEREST OF A.D.C. AND E. N.C., CHILDREN

          On Appeal from the 318th District Court Midland County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. FM 50087.

          Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J. [3]

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          John M. Bailey, Chief Justice.

         Father appeals the trial court's order granting Mother's petition to modify the parent-child relationship with their children, A.D.C. and E. N.C. The trial court entered the order based upon the jury's verdict in favor of Mother. Father brings two issues on appeal. We affirm.

         Background Facts

         Father and Mother are the parents of A.D.C. and E. N.C. On February 25, 2010, the trial court entered a final decree of divorce dissolving their marriage. The divorce decree appointed Father and Mother as joint managing conservators of the children. Under the divorce decree, neither parent had the exclusive right to determine the primary residence of the children. Instead, the divorce decree provided as follows:

[T]he primary residence of the children shall be restricted to Midland County, Texas and any county contiguous thereto, and the parties shall not remove the children from Midland County, Texas and any county contiguous thereto for the purpose of changing the primary residence of the children until modified by further order of the court of continuing jurisdiction or by written agreement signed by the parties and filed with the court.

         Furthermore, the divorce decree provided that the parties would have equal possession of the children to be exercised on alternating weeks.

         On June 18, 2015, Mother filed a petition to modify the parent-child relationship based upon an allegation of a material and substantial change in circumstances. In the petition, Mother requested that she be permitted to designate the primary residence of the children without regard to geographic restriction. Mother also requested the trial court to implement a standard possession order to modify Father's access and possession. Subsequently, Father filed a counterpetition to modify the parent-child relationship seeking to be the parent to designate the primary residence of the children.

         The trial court considered the petitions seeking modification at a final hearing conducted as a bench trial on November 12, 2015. The trial court notified the parties of its decision in a letter ruling issued on that date. The trial court subsequently entered a written order on January 20, 2016, wherein it denied each party's request seeking appointment as the conservator with the exclusive right to designate the children's primary residence. Furthermore, the trial court did not modify the prior order restricting the children's primary residence to Midland County or counties contiguous thereto. In its findings of fact and conclusions of law, the trial court found that modification was not in the best interests of the children. Accordingly, the provisions of the divorce decree remained intact with respect to the parents' possession of the children and the children's residence.

         On January 11, 2016, Mother filed a new petition to modify the parent-child relationship.[1] In this petition seeking to modify the terms of the divorce decree, she alleged a material and substantial change based upon an allegation that the paternal grandfather was arrested for indecency with a child in January 2016. The alleged victim was not one of the children that are the subject of this appeal. Mother sought appointment as the person with the authority to designate the primary residence of the children. Mother also sought to deny Father access to the children until a doctor had the opportunity to evaluate the children. Mother also requested temporary orders seeking this requested relief.

         On February 12, 2016, the trial court held a hearing regarding Mother's request for temporary orders. The trial court orally pronounced that a material and substantial change warranted the parties' appointment as temporary joint managing conservators with Mother appointed as the parent with the exclusive right to determine the primary residence of the children.

         On April 20, 2016, the trial court entered written temporary orders with respect to the February 12, 2016 hearing. These written orders contained a finding that the children's circumstances had materially and substantially changed since the rendition of the most recent final order. The trial court appointed both parties as temporary joint managing conservators and gave Mother the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the children within Midland County. The trial court also adopted the standard possession order regarding Father's access to and possession of the children, and it prohibited contact with the paternal grandparents. Father subsequently filed a counterpetition for the same relief and requested a jury trial on the matter. Mother later filed a supplemental motion to modify the order to remove the prior geographic restriction of Midland County and adjacent counties.

         On December 12, 2016, a jury trial on the parties' requested modifications began. After hearing the evidence, the jury returned a verdict to the effect that the 2010 divorce decree should be modified. The jury determined that Mother should have the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the children with geographic restrictions. The geographic restriction imposed by the jury was Midland County, within a 150-mile radius of Midland County, or within a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.