How Texas Courts Handle Alcohol Concerns, Property Division, and Custody Disputes
When a marriage unravels amid allegations of excessive drinking, adultery, and disputes over children and property, the resulting litigation can become extraordinarily complex. The October 2025 decision in In the Matter of the Marriage of K.J. and J.J. (No. 13-24-00222-CV) from the Corpus Christi-Edinburg Court of Appeals provides a comprehensive look at how Texas courts evaluate these intertwined issues. For anyone considering divorce in the Dallas area, this case offers crucial insights into property division standards, custody evaluation procedures, and the weight courts give to evidence of alcohol abuse and marital misconduct.
Per the published opinion, this case touches on issues that arise frequently in contested divorces: disproportionate property awards based on fault, modification of custody arrangements from 50/50 to standard possession, and claims of judicial bias. Understanding how the appellate court analyzed these issues can help you prepare for your own divorce proceedings. An experienced divorce lawyer in Dallas can explain how these legal principles might apply to your specific situation and help you develop realistic expectations about potential outcomes.
Key Takeaways
- Disproportionate Property Division: Findings of adultery and cruel treatment (fault) can justify a highly unequal division of community property (e.g., 75% to one spouse).
- Custody Evaluator Impact: The custody evaluator’s recommendations carry substantial weight and can lead a court to change a 50/50 arrangement to a Standard Possession Order.
- Alcohol/Fault Evidence: Clean Soberlink tests may not outweigh concerns raised by an evaluator regarding anger control or a party’s refusal to acknowledge any history of problematic drinking.
- Judicial Bias Bar is High: Claims of judicial bias will likely fail if based only on a judge’s unfavorable rulings or efficient case management decisions (e.g., knowing the case history
Case Background: A High-Conflict Divorce with Children
K.J. and J.J. married in 2014 and had three children together, born in 2015, 2017, and 2020. K.J. filed for divorce in 2021, and the case proceeded through nearly three years of contentious litigation before reaching final trial in November 2023. During the pendency of the case, the parties operated under agreed temporary orders that established a 50/50 custody schedule while both continued living in the family residence—an arrangement that quickly became untenable.
The temporary orders granted K.J. exclusive use of the master bedroom and bathroom, but disputes arose over J.J.’s compliance with these boundaries. K.J. testified about discovering evidence that J.J. had used the master bedroom while she was traveling for work, and she described escalating verbal conflicts that affected the children. In June 2022, the court modified the temporary orders to grant K.J. exclusive use of the entire residence, required both parties to submit to Soberlink alcohol monitoring, and ordered a custody evaluation by a licensed psychologist.
Both parties made serious allegations against each other. K.J. claimed J.J. had a significant drinking problem, engaged in multiple affairs during the marriage, and exhibited anger management issues, including an incident where he physically confronted a male friend of K.J.’s in front of the children. J.J. denied the drinking allegations, pointed to his clean Soberlink results throughout the case, and accused K.J. of having an affair that precipitated the divorce. A seasoned Dallas family law attorney experienced in high-conflict cases understands how to present evidence effectively while protecting clients from unfounded accusations.
Legal Analysis: Three Issues on Appeal
Can Adultery and Fault Justify a 75% Property Award?
J.J.’s first appellate issue challenged the trial court’s property division, which awarded K.J. approximately 75% of the marital estate. Under Texas Family Code § 7.001, courts must divide community property in a manner that is “just and right,” considering factors outlined in M. v. M., 615 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1981). These factors include the spouses’ relative earning capacities, fault in the breakup of the marriage, benefits the innocent spouse would have derived from continuation of the marriage, and the nature of the property involved.
The trial court found that J.J. was “guilty of adultery” and “guilty of cruel treatment” toward K.J. J.J. did not dispute that sufficient evidence supported these findings on appeal. Instead, he challenged specific valuations, a $53,590 waste claim, and a $108,872 reimbursement claim related to his separate property. The appellate court noted that the parties had stipulated to the reimbursement amount, and K.J.’s testimony supported the waste claim valuation based on community funds spent to benefit J.J.’s parents’ rental property.
Importantly, while adultery and fault can support a disproportionate division, the Texas Supreme Court in Y. v. Y., 609 S.W.2d 758 (Tex. 1980), cautioned that property division should not be used as “punishment” for the spouse at fault. Nevertheless, appellate courts give trial courts wide discretion in property matters, and the appellant bears the burden to show the division was “manifestly unjust and unfair.” See B. v. Br., 555 S.W.3d 539, 543 (Tex. 2018). The court found no abuse of discretion here.
What Evidence Supports Changing from 50/50 to Standard Possession?
J.J.’s second issue challenged the court’s decision to award K.J. primary custody with J.J. receiving modified standard visitation, a significant reduction from the 50/50 arrangement that had been in place during the case. The custody evaluator, Dr. T., recommended this change based on her evaluation of both parties and interviews with collateral witnesses.
Dr. T. testified that J.J. had difficulty acknowledging his alcohol issues, showed “a lot of difficulty in controlling” his anger, and blamed his child for the incident where they shot at a large portrait of K.J.’s face. She expressed concern that J.J. would not “promote the relationship with the mother the same way the mother will promote the relationship with the father”, a key consideration under the H. v. A. best interest factors. See 544 S.W.2d 367, 371-72 (Tex. 1976).
J.J. argued that the evidence “preponderates toward” continuing the 50/50 arrangement, but the appellate court emphasized that it cannot reweigh evidence on appeal. The trial court, as the exclusive arbiter of witness credibility, was entitled to believe Dr. T.’s testimony over contrary evidence. For parents facing child custody disputes, this case demonstrates how custody evaluators’ recommendations can significantly influence outcomes. A reliable Dallas child custody lawyer can help you understand how to engage constructively with the evaluation process.
Do Trial Management Comments Show Judicial Bias?
J.J.’s third issue alleged that the trial court’s comments—including statements that she “know[s] enough history in this case” and exhortations to avoid repetitious questioning- demonstrated judicial bias that deprived him of a fair trial. The appellate court firmly rejected this argument.
Texas courts presume trial judges are neutral and detached, absent a “clear showing to the contrary.” See In re K.L.R., 162 S.W.3d 291, 312 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2005, no pet.). Judicial bias must “stem from an extrajudicial source”, meaning information obtained outside the normal course of proceedings. Here, the trial court’s familiarity with the case came from proper sources: pleadings, prior hearing testimony, and the custody evaluation report. Moreover, trial courts have broad discretion to manage proceedings efficiently and avoid wasting time. See D.C. Co. v. F., 46 S.W.3d 237, 240-41 (Tex. 2001).
The court noted that “judicial rulings alone are rarely sufficient to demonstrate judicial bias,” and allegations of partiality should not be made simply because a party disagrees with the judge’s rulings.” This holding reinforces that challenging a judge’s impartiality requires substantial evidence of improper conduct, not merely unfavorable outcomes.
Key Takeaways for Dallas Divorcing Couples
This case reinforces several principles critical for anyone navigating divorce in Texas. First, findings of adultery and cruel treatment can justify significant, disproportionate property divisions, but these findings require clear and positive evidence, not mere suggestion. Second, custody evaluations carry substantial weight, and how you present yourself to the evaluator matters enormously. Third, Soberlink monitoring results can cut both ways: clean tests may undermine alcohol allegations, but evaluators may discount them if a party refuses to acknowledge any history of problematic drinking. Finally, claims of judicial bias face an extremely high burden and are unlikely to succeed based solely on case management decisions or unfavorable rulings. Working with a trusted Dallas child support lawyer who understands these dynamics can help you prepare comprehensively for all aspects of your case.
Strategic Insights: Alternative Approaches
This case illustrates how different strategies might have affected various outcomes. Earlier engagement with alcohol treatment programs, regardless of whether one believes treatment is necessary, might have presented differently to the custody evaluator. More specific pleadings regarding custody preferences could have strengthened procedural arguments on appeal. Thorough preparation for custody evaluations, including understanding what evaluators look for, can significantly influence recommendations. Those searching for an expert divorce attorney near me should prioritize attorneys who prepare clients comprehensively for every phase of litigation.
Protect Your Interests with Experienced Dallas Family Law Representation
At the Law Office of Michael P. Granata, we bring over 25 years of Dallas family law experience to every case. As a trusted Dallas divorce attorney, we provide honest assessments rather than false promises, helping clients understand realistic outcomes while developing effective strategies. Whether you’re facing allegations in your divorce, concerned about custody arrangements, or navigating complex property division, we offer transparent communication and compassionate guidance.
We serve clients throughout the Dallas metropolitan area, including Irving, Richardson, Garland, Mesquite, DeSoto, Grand Prairie, Lakewood, Highland Park, Cockrell Hill, Lancaster, Seagoville, and Duncanville. If you’re considering divorce or facing a contested custody matter, contact us for a Dallas divorce lawyer consultation to discuss your situation. Learn more about attorney Michael P. Granata and how the best divorce lawyer in Dallas can help protect your interests during this challenging time.
More Resources on Property Division
- Court of Appeals Greenlights Post-Divorce Asset Division
- Texas Court Clarifies Reimbursement Rights and Marital Property Agreements – Key Lessons
- What a 2025 Dallas Court of Appeals Case Reveals About Property Division in Divorce
- Property Division Lessons from Recent Texas Court Case
- Community Property: How Does it Impact Your Divorce
- Texas Court Reverses Property Division When Separate Property Becomes Community: Critical Lessons from the T. Case
- High-Stakes Property Division Battle: Texas Court Affirms Unequal Asset Split in Divorce
