A Texas appellate court recently issued a comprehensive ruling that touched on three of the most contested issues in any Texas divorce: child possession schedules, child support calculation, and separate versus community property characterization. For anyone currently navigating, or preparing to navigate, a divorce in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, the December 2025 opinion in In the Matter of the Marriage of K.S. and S.S. (2025 WL 3724379, Tex. App.—Tyler) provides an instructive look at how courts apply these legal standards when parties are in sharp conflict. Whether you are searching for a Dallas divorce attorney or simply trying to understand your rights, understanding how appellate courts reason through these issues can help you make more informed decisions.
Per the published opinion, the case arose out of Cherokee County, Texas, and was decided by the Twelfth Court of Appeals in Tyler. The trial court’s final decree of divorce was appealed on three grounds: (1) that the modified possession order lacked sufficient evidentiary support; (2) that child support was set above guideline levels without proper justification; and (3) that certain property was incorrectly characterized as community rather than separate. The appellate court affirmed on all three issues, a result with important implications for Dallas-area families facing similar disputes.
Case Background: A High-Conflict Divorce With Complex Financial and Parenting Issues
The marriage between K.S. and S.S. began in October 2015. The couple had two minor children, ages six and four at the time of trial. K.S. filed for divorce in June 2021, citing insupportability, the most common ground for divorce in Texas. S.S. filed a counterpetition on the same grounds.
What followed was nearly three years of proceedings before a bench trial was held in February 2024 across three separate days. The factual record that emerged was significant. The trial court appointed a certified forensic evaluator and clinician, B.W., to conduct a full custody evaluation, and an amicus attorney was appointed to represent the children’s interests.
The financial picture was equally complex. S.S. operated a farm LLC from which he drew $1,000 per week, and he was simultaneously on FMLA leave from an oil field employer. The farm LLC had purchased and subsequently sold a 476-acre tract for between $2.1 and $2.2 million. S.S. claimed that numerous assets, including land acquired through a series of IRS Section 1031 like-kind exchanges, farm equipment, and business accounts, were his separate property, traceable to premarital assets. The trial court was skeptical, and that skepticism was central to the outcome.
For anyone dealing with business ownership, real estate, or complex financial arrangements in a Texas divorce, this case demonstrates why working with an experienced Dallas family law attorney is so critical from the very beginning of the process.
Legal Analysis: How the Court Ruled on All Three Issues
Modified Possession Order: When Courts Depart From the Standard Schedule
Under Texas Family Code Section 153.252, there is a rebuttable presumption that the standard possession order (SPO) is in the best interest of the child. However, Section 153.253 permits the trial court to deviate from the SPO if its terms would be “unworkable or inappropriate.” Section 153.256 then directs trial courts to consider the child’s age and developmental needs, the circumstances of each parent, and any other relevant factor.
In this case, the trial court entered a Modified Standard Possession Order (MSPO) giving S.S. possession only on the second and fourth weekends each month, fewer than the standard schedule, and required him to be personally present for the entire visitation period. If S.S. was working during his scheduled possession, he would forfeit that time entirely.
The appellate court upheld this deviation based on the totality of the evidence. The forensic evaluator testified that S.S. met diagnostic criteria for narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and a grandiose delusional disorder, and she described him as calculating and lacking empathy. The amicus attorney representing the children stated that “we’re a long way from 50/50 in this case.” There was also evidence of false CPS reports filed against K.S., a pattern of non-compliance with court orders, the children’s exposure to a registered sex offender while in S.S.’s care, and a credible concern about international child abduction, S.S.’s father owned property in the Bahamas, and S.S. had previously taken the children there without apparent concern for court authority.
The court applied the standard from G. v. G., 644 S.W.2d 449 (Tex. 1982), which holds that possession decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Under In re J.J.R.S., 627 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2021), trial courts are afforded wide deference because they can observe witness demeanor and “sense the forces, powers, and influences that cannot be discerned by merely reading the record.”
What this means for Dallas parents: If you are a Dallas child custody lawyer client or parent facing custody litigation, this case underscores that a court can and will depart from the standard possession schedule when there is substantive, probative evidence supporting that departure. A forensic evaluator’s findings, documented history of court order violations, and concerns about child safety can each independently justify a modified schedule. Judges are not required to find fault on every possible ground, one strong basis, supported by credible evidence, is sufficient.
Child Support: Imputed Income and Above-Guideline Awards
The child support analysis in this case is particularly instructive for anyone consulting a Dallas child support lawyer about complex income situations.
S.S. argued that the trial court erred by calculating his monthly net resources at over $11,200, contending that the only income the court should have considered was his $1,000 per week draw from farm LLC. The appellate court disagreed. Under Texas Family Code Section 154.062, net resources include all income from any source, wages, self-employment, capital gains, and more. Critically, Section 154.067 allows courts to impute income to assets that are not currently producing income and to income-producing assets where a party has “voluntarily transferred” value or “intentionally reduced” earnings.
The trial court found S.S.’s total net monthly resources were at least $11,200. It applied the statutory 25% guideline for two children to the first $9,200 of net resources (yielding $2,300), and then ordered an additional $500 above guidelines based on the parties’ respective incomes and the children’s proven needs, as expressly authorized by Section 154.126. The final obligation was $2,800 per month.
The court also rejected S.S.’s argument that his H&P employment income should be excluded. Although S.S. was on FMLA leave at the time of trial, he remained employed. His own prior testimony established that he worked 40 hours per week plus 40–50 hours of overtime when active. The trial court was entitled to use that testimony as a basis for calculating resources, especially in light of evidence that farm LLC had recently realized approximately $700,000 from a land sale, with funds remaining in a 1031 exchange account.
The rule from In re K.M.B., 606 S.W.3d 889 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2020) is clear: the duty to support a child extends to a parent’s ability to pay from any and all available sources, not just current employment.
Practical takeaway for Dallas families: If a spouse controls a business, holds assets in exchange accounts, or has voluntarily reduced income during divorce proceedings, courts have the tools to look past stated earnings. Working with an experienced Dallas divorce attorney who understands business valuation and income analysis is essential to presenting, or defending against, a complex child support calculation.
Separate Property Tracing: Why Documentation Is Everything
The property division issue in this case illustrates one of the most common and consequential challenges in Texas divorce: proving that assets are separate, not community, property.
Under Texas Family Code Section 3.003, all property possessed by either spouse during or at dissolution of a marriage is presumed to be community property. To overcome this presumption, the claiming spouse must prove separate character by clear and convincing evidence, a higher standard than the preponderance of the evidence used in most civil cases.
S.S. claimed numerous items as separate property, including land acquired through a chain of 1031 exchanges, farm equipment owned through farm LLC, and two lots conveyed to him by K.S.’s great aunt. He offered warranty deeds, exchange agreement documents, and his own testimony tracing the funds from a premarital gift through a series of land sales and reinvestments.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s rejection of these claims. Under Z. v. Z., 116 S.W.3d 309 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003), “mere testimony that property was purchased with separate property funds, without any tracing of the funds, is generally insufficient.” When separate and community funds have been commingled to the point where they cannot be separated, the community property presumption prevails. The trial court found that S.S.’s 1031 exchange documents did not adequately demonstrate the separate character of those funds, and that his testimony was insufficient without corroborating bank records or accounting documentation prepared by a third party.
The court ultimately entered a $152,500 equalizing judgment in K.S.’s favor and awarded her the 401(k) account. Considering the parties’ disparate earning capacities, business resources, and financial obligations, the framework from M. v. M., 615 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1981), this was deemed a just and right division.
Key Takeaways for Dallas Divorcing Couples
This case delivers several critical lessons for anyone considering divorce in Dallas, Irving, Richardson, Garland, or the surrounding areas:
- Courts will deviate from the standard possession order when there is credible evidence that the standard schedule is not in the children’s best interest.
- Child support can be calculated based on imputed income from assets and prior earning history, not just current stated income.
- Separate property claims require meticulous, documented tracing from inception of title through every transaction. A deed alone is rarely enough.
- Compliance with court orders throughout the proceedings matters enormously, judges notice, and appellate courts defer to those observations.
Strategic Insights: What This Case Teaches About Representation
Cases with this level of complexity, multiple income sources, business ownership, real estate transactions, and contested custody, benefit from early, comprehensive legal strategy. Different approaches might have included engaging a forensic accountant to prepare independent tracing documentation for the 1031 exchange funds, presenting third-party bank records rather than self-prepared accounting summaries, and proactively addressing custody concerns through voluntary compliance with court orders before trial. The experienced lawyer in Dallas for your situation is one who understands that trial courts have wide discretion, and helps you build the factual record that supports your position.
Consult a Dallas Divorce Attorney With 25+ Years of Family Law Experience
At the Law Office of Michael P. Granata, we’ve spent over 25 years representing clients in some of Dallas’s most complex divorce and family law matters. We serve families across Dallas, Irving, Richardson, Garland, Mesquite, DeSoto, Grand Prairie, Lakewood, Highland Park, Cockrell Hill, Lancaster, Seagoville, and Duncanville.
We understand that behind every appellate opinion is a real family navigating some of the hardest decisions of their lives. That’s why we provide honest assessments, not false promises, and transparent communication about what realistic outcomes look like in your specific situation.
Whether your case involves contested custody, child support calculations with complex income, or separate property claims tied to business interests and real estate, a Dallas divorce lawyer consultation with our office is the first step toward understanding your options.
Schedule Your Confidential Consultation Today →
Learn more about our firm and attorney Michael P. Granata, our Dallas child custody services, and our Dallas child support representation. If you’re searching for a divorce attorney near me in the Dallas area, we’re here to help.
