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.

How to Handle Liabilities for You and Your Spouse and Children

The biggest change in recent times is Congress’ radical changes in bankruptcy laws in 2005. Credit card debt is much harder to get rid of, and you can make yourself liable in someone else entire credit card debt by using (and signing) one credit charge slip.

Spousal Liability During Marriage

There is a common misconception that there are “community debts” or “community liabilities.” The general rule in Texas is that liability follows management. This concept will be explored in more depth later in this article. First, some general information on responsibility for debts and liabilities for one’s spouse and children.

Spouses can have direct and indirect legal responsibility for debts or liabilities.

Direct responsibility occurs when a spouse signs an instrument or contract obligating himself or herself. A common example would be an application for credit.

Indirect liability is based on agency principles and the doctrine of necessaries.

Under the Texas Family Code, a person is personally liable for the acts of the person’s spouse only if: (1) the spouse acts as an agent for the person; or (2) the spouse incurs a debt for necessaries. A spouse does not act as an agent for the other spouse solely because of the marriage relationship.

The doctrine of necessaries was a part of the common law of the State of Texas, and is now set out in the Texas Family Code as follows:

“Each spouse has the duty to support the other spouse. Each parent has the duty to support his or her child during the period that the child is a minor, and thereafter as long as the child is fully enrolled in an accredited secondary school in a program leading toward a high school diploma until the end of the school year in which the child graduates. A spouse or a parent who fails to discharge the duty of support is liable to any person who provides necessaries to those to whom support is owed.”

What is “necessary” varies from case to case, and is dependent upon one’s station in life. At a minimum, necessaries include food, clothing, shelter, and non-elective medical care.

As stated above, what property can be taken to satisfy a debt depends on the management rights of that property.

With the exception of homestead property, each spouse has the sole management, control, and disposition of: 1) his or her separate property; and 2) the community property that he or she would have owned if single (personal earnings; revenue from separate property; recoveries from personal injuries; etc.). All other community property is subject to the joint management, control, and disposition of the husband and wife, unless the spouses provide otherwise by power of attorney in writing or other agreement.

Generally, the only property that is subject to seizure for a spouse’s liabilities is property over which that spouse has some right of management or control. Torts committed during marriage, however, are treated differently. The rules of marital property liability are as follows:

A spouse’s separate property is not subject to the liabilities of the other spouse unless both spouses are liable by other rules of law. Again, an example would be when both spouses sign a contract or loan application.
Unless the incurring spouse is acting as an agent or is incurring a debt for necessaries, the community property subject to a spouse’s sole management, control, and disposition is not subject to: a) any liabilities that the other spouse incurred before marriage; or b) any nontortious liabilities that the other spouse incurs during marriage.
The community property subject to a spouse’s sole or joint management, control, and disposition is subject to the liabilities incurred by him or her before or during the marriage.
All community property is subject to the tortious liability of either spouse incurred during marriage.

These rules can be altered by premarital or postmarital contracts or agreements, subject to the rights of existing creditors. Additionally, a creditor may agree to only look to a certain source for repayment of a debt – ie: looking only to a spouse’s separate property or to a specific property as security for repayment of the debt.

The ability to actually seize property to satisfy a liability is limited by the Texas Constitution, the Texas Property Code, and the Texas Insurance Code.

The Texas Constitution protects the homestead from seizure for claims of creditors except for purchase money; taxes on the property; properly executed liens for home improvements; and owelty in a divorce situation. It also prevents the garnishment of current wages except for court-ordered child support payments.

The Texas Property Code exempts certain personal property from execution, in an amount not to exceed $15,000.00 for an individual and $30,000.00 for a family. A list of items eligible for the exemption is listed in Section 42.002 of the Texas Property Code, and includes items such as furniture, tools and items used in a trade or profession, and one car. The Property Code also establishes an exemption for retirement plans.

The Texas Insurance Code exempts all proceeds payable under a life, health, or accident policy. The cash surrender value of a life insurance policy is also exempted if it has been in force for more than two years, and a family member or dependent is a beneficiary.

The new “wild card” in the liability area is the 2005 Bankruptcy reform law that was passed by Congress/ the Credit Card Company lobbyists. Also another law went into effect in January, 2006, DOUBLING the required the minimum monthly payment on a credit card debt. Signing on another’s credit card can make you liable on the entire balance of the credit card, even if you had nothing to do with the prior charges on the card. Check out this site for consumer credit information.

Liability for Debts and Torts of Children

In general, persons under the age of 18 cannot make contracts. The principal source of liability for parents for the contracts of their children arises from the general duty to support and the doctrine of necessaries, both of which were discussed above.

A parent is also generally not liable for the torts of a child simply based on the family relationship. There must be some basis for personal liability. A parent can be liable for acts of his or her own negligence, resulting in the child’s tort. Common examples would be negligent entrustment of an automobile or firearm.

By statute, parents have some liability for the property damage caused by the torts of their children. A parent (or other person having the duty of control and reasonable discipline of the child) is liable for any property damage proximately caused by: 1) the negligent conduct of the child if the conduct is reasonably attributable to the negligent failure of the parent or other person to exercise that duty; or 2) the wilful and malicious conduct of a child who is between 12 and 18 years of age. Recovery for damages caused by wilful and malicious conduct is limited to actual damages, not to exceed $15,000.00 per act, plus court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. See the new law dealing with damages to hotel rooms.