Family Law Topics:

Client Testimonials

I was referred to Ken Raggio by a friend and neighbor who used Ken Raggio to represent her in her divorce. She was very happy with his representation of her, so I consulted with Ken and he recommended that, due to the facts of the case, I was financially better off staying married to my husband as long as possible. Basically a year or so later I found out that my husband had filed for divorce, so I hired Ken. We then had a meeting of the two lawyers with the two parties to discuss having an efficient and amicable divorce proceeding. Over the next several months we exchanged sworn inventories and each other’s financial records. The case was set for trial, but we settled it in a mediation a month before trial and after both sides knew what the whole story was. Additionally, Ken helped me walk through the emotional issues of dealing with the end of a long-term marriage. I am grateful for his support and guidance. I’m very pleased with the services that I received from Ken and his firm and highly recommend them. -SdS-
I looked up international divorce on the web. I found Ken Raggio. I was also referred to him by an attorney who knows the reputation of the Raggio’s in the Dallas legal community and specifically in divorce and family law. Specifically, my husband and I had last lived together at his home in Germany. Which meant that this was an international divorce case. My goals were very clear: I wanted to get a divorce, instead of spending months or years and a small fortune dealing with jurisdictional issues that arise all the time in international divorces. So Ken devised a straightforward and efficient plan to try and help me achieve my goal. And it worked! I went to court with Ken just three months after the divorce was filed and got my divorce granted. B.G.
I talked to Tom Raggio a couple years ago about filing for divorce and authorized him to do it, but later changed my mind. I can’t get back those two years, but I finally called the Raggio’s again. This time with my and Tom’s agreement, Ken Raggio met with me. Ken was very direct with me in indicating that everything was my choice. He asked this question: are you willing to take the risk that you be in the same place two years from now that you were two years ago? Over a couple of weeks, I realized that our attempts to deal with my spouses alcoholism that cost us many thousand dollars and really hadn’t worked out to make the marriage worthwhile. So reluctantly, So I filed for divorce. Ken suggested that we draw up a complete package to be able to settle the case. This took a lot of work, but Ken was able to attach all the paperwork necessary to resolve the case with my spouse in my case and these other settlement papers attached with the papers that would be served or delivered by the process server to my spouse. With very few changes, this became the deal that my spouse and I agreed on and that the court approved by signing the decree of divorce. I am very pleased with the guidance and comfort that Ken Raggio and the Raggio firm has given to me in finally dealing with my dead marriage, and giving me the encouragement to move on with my life. And I’m sure it will be a happier life! I highly recommend Ken and his firm. C.F.
My child’s father and I had an amicable divorce a couple years ago. Our possession schedule went okay for a while with little changes here and accommodations there working out. I didn’t even really pay attention to the fact that he wasn’t paying what he agreed he would pay. I even took or picked up our child at the father’s work in another county to help him out. It wasn’t long before my agreements and accommodations to the father led to his bullying of me. This eventually led to me saying we should follow the possession schedule that we had agreed to at the time of divorce. Well, he didn’t like that, and he responded with more bullying, filing a pleading seeking to have temporary custody of our child and filing an untruthful 33 point affidavit. So here I am with a lawsuit. I was referred to Ken Raggio by another lawyer who is also listed as a D Magazine Best Lawyer. He looked over the pleadings and affidavit, and said that this was bogus, but that I still had to defend myself. Well 5 court appearances over five months ( the father appealed the denial of his initial requests by the associate judge to the district judge, and lost again) and a final trial, Ken’s advice was borne out: the father was completely denied all relief he sought, my child support was raised almost a thousand dollars a month, and I was awarded $20,000 in my attorneys fees for the father to pay. And he has to pick up and deliver our child at my house, or to our child’s school, which both are in a different county that the father lives in. I didn’t expect to have to hire Ken this year, but I am glad that I did. Not only did he set the table to deny the father’ relief, but he also got sworn testimony submitted in trial showing that the father had lied in filing his federal tax returns by wrongly saying he had paid for day care and was the primary parent. I think the father now knows that I have a strong attorney just in case he is thinking about starting up his bullying again. I highly recommend Ken and his firm. A. W.
My husband suddenly filed for divorce last year, and even though we had not been getting along, the filing was a shock to me. My husband sat at our kitchen table and told me that he had drawn up an agreement that was “fair and equitable”. He told me that I would not need an attorney, because he had hired an attorney that would be “ours.” He insisted spending more money on attorneys would be a waste. Despite my husband’s reassurance that he was doing the best thing for me and our two young children, I decided to speak to an attorney. Somehow, I was lucky enough to have a friend suggest Raggio and Raggio and I made an appointment. Within 20 minutes of meeting with Ken Raggio, he had already pulled up the information on my house (that my husband and I shared since before the birth of our first daughter), only to learn that I in fact, (and contrary to what I had been told), I was not an owner of the house. Unfortunately, Ken had the duty of showing me the bad news; I was on the deed of trust, but not the deed. So in essence, I was financially responsible for the house, but had no ownership in our home. Additionally, my husband had emptied our bank accounts of over six figures and put it beyond my reach. Essentially, I had nothing. I was left to borrow money and bounce checks in order to take care of the children and pay for child care. He had the house. He took the money. He had more than half a million dollars in retirement; and I did not even have enough money to hire an attorney. Or so I thought... Ken Raggio also informed me that my husband had hired a very aggressive lawyer whose only position was that my husband was “right about everything and I should just agree to his terms because he was being generous” In that so-called generous offer, my husband got his house (after all, it was his separate property) and I got a little bit of savings, got child support, my car, and my retirement. To quote Ken, “this would be the deal you would get in your worst day in court.” And so our divorce started in earnest. Well, we had to set various matters down for a hearing before the court that would get him to move off of his “my way or the highway” view of the divorce and of life in general. So we got temporary orders about my use of the house, about support, use of credit cards, and payment of attorneys and legal expenses. Oh, yeah, we also managed to get my husband’s huge and upcoming bonus frozen so he could not try and hide that from me or our children. Even though it was a contentious and expensive divorce, I am smiling: I got the house with (with the mortgage paid in full) and my children have the stability of staying in the only home they have ever known. Additionally, I got my retirement, a car, and above guideline child support. I have more enthusiasm at work and more time with my children. Moving forward, life is good. I am stronger than I could have ever imagined and I fought for what I knew was right; but, I truly believe that I would not have been able to do so without Ken Raggio and his firm. Only now do I understand that practicing law seems to be a delicate balance of timing, emotional support, stern advice, and knowing the law. Ken Raggio has that delicate balance down to a science. I am extremely grateful to Ken Raggio and his firm for helping me get the courage and resolve to fight for myself and my children, and as Ken said, to get my husband’s “foot off of my neck.” I highly recommend Ken and his firm. ARB

Email Us

Bold labels are required.

Gay Divorce in Play in Texas–Not Anymore!

In October, 2009, Judge Tena Callahan, Judge of the 302nd Family District Court of Dallas County, Texas ruled that two gay men, who were legally married in Massachusetts and moved to Texas, were legally entitled to get a divorce in Texas. Her decision was overturned by the Texas Fifth Court on Appeals in 2010.

Judge Callahan based her decision upon the United States Constitution, specifically the Full Faith and credit clause of Article IV, Section 1 that states as follows:

“Full Faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”

This means the couples marriage was entitled to the same respect as a marriage recognized or performed in Texas–that is, given equal protection.

To make her finding that the U.S. Constitution was the supreme “law” applicable to the situation, Judge Callahan ruled that the conflicting provisions of the Texas Constitution were unconstitutional. The Texas Constitution states that a marriage is between a man and a woman.

The Texas Attorney General tried to intervene in the divorce case in Judge Callahan’s court to argue that Texas law precluded her from considering a divorce action between two men, but such intervention was denied by Judge Callahan.

But her opinion was overturned by the Appellate Court.

2011 Update

In January 2011, the Texas Third Court of Appeals ruled that a gay couple legally married in another state and who were granted a Texas divorce by a District Court in Austin, Texas, would stay divorced despite the efforts of the Texas Attorney General to overturn that granting of the divorce. That story is here.

The issue as it appears today is:

Does a Texas court have jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage between two men, who were legally married in another state, when the Texas Constitution and laws of the State of Texas do not recognize such a marriage?

Since two Texas Courts of Appeal have come to opposite results, clearly the Texas Supreme Court is next in line to issue its opinion. The issue in Texas and the other States may ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court.

The argument that Texas cannot grant a divorce, deals with the idea that Texas has control over its laws and its citizens; the fact that someone could be issued a hunting license or driver’s license in another state does not mean that Texas is obliged to issue such a license to someone when and if they move to Texas. In other words, if you can’t get married in Texas, you can’t get a divorce in Texas.

Authority for this position includes the 2007 ruling by the Rhode Island Supreme Court that held a lesbian couple (legally married in Massachucetts) could not get a divorce because the Rhode Island statute didn’t define them as being married so they couldn’t divorce. But no mention was made of the Full Faith and Credit issue. That case’s facts are here.

The argument for there being jurisdiction to grant the divorce include the fact that marriage is the status of the parties and is much more pervasive and inclusive than a mere license. Since the status of the Dallas parties seeking a divorce –their marriage–was recognized in Massachusetts, their status must be equally protected and recognized in Texas — — at least for purposes of dissolving their marriage status by divorce.

Authority for this position includes the case of Finstuen v Crutcher , a 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (federal court) decision in 2007 holding that:

“Oklahoma’s adoption amendment is unconstitutional in its refusal to recognize final adoption orders of other states that permit adoption by same-sex couples.”

So we shall wait and see.

The original Newspaper report of the Dallas, Texas case is here. The reports of the Austin case is here.

2015 UPDATE

THE US SUPREME COURT ENDED ALL THIS FOOLISHNESS IN JUNE 2015 BY RULING THAT GAY MARRIAGES WERE GOOD IN ALL 50 STATES

Last time I checked, Texas is one of those 50 states…

Note: Gay and lesbian couples in Texas, to end their relationships here in Texas without the possibility of a divorce of their-legal-in-state-where-married marriage, are relegated to partnershiplaw for the rules to divide their union/ their property. Most often this leads to the “have” partner doing very well at the expense of the “have not” partner. There are many issues that flat out are not addressed in partnership law that are routine and nearly-automatic in a divorce situation. Like the presumption that all property is community property… whereas under partnership law there is only the property owned by either of the partners as their individual property that is scantily-if-at-all subject to the claims of the other partner. Cohabitation agreements can address this perceived inequity in gay/lesbian relationships, whereas it is automatic where there can be a divorce. A BIG difference. but now the Gay couple who breaks up can now have the dignity, predictability, and in a lot more cases, fairness by going intoa divorce court rather than through the limited methods they were limited to in Texas.