Recently, our office building was purchased by Richardson Independent School District. Richardson I.S.D. did not renew any of the tenants' leases and has required all tenants, our law office included, to vacate.

We are looking for a cost-effective alternative that provides a convenient location while allowing us to keep the cost of our legal services low for our clients. In the current real estate market, this is not easily done. Until we find an office location that meets our requirements, we have a temporary office location available in the Park Cities area.

Stay tuned for updates.

Since the last update in mid April, the House version of the Hearing Protection Act of 2015 has 15 additional cosponsors.

From Texas, Randy Weber, Louie Gohmert, Pete Olson, Gene Green, and Sam Johnson.

From Ohio, Brad Wenstrup and Jim Jordan.

From Virginia, Robert Wittman and H. Morgan Griffith.

From North Carolina, Mark Meadows.

From South Carolina, Mick Mulvaney.

From Colorado, Doug Lamborn.

From Alabama, Gary Palmer.

From Michigan, Tim Walberg.

And from Washington, Cathy McMorris Rogers.

There has been no additional action on the Senate version of the bill.

Q: I've been told that once I become married, everything will become community property. Is this right? I have a house I've already paid off. My fiance also has her own house, and she's almost paid off the mortgage. Is it true that these houses will become community property once we're married? What will my fiance's house be if I make some of the mortgage payments after we're married?

H.R.3799 has two new cosponsors, Republican Representative Mike Pompeo of Kansas, and Republican Representative John Ratcliffe of Texas. The House version of The Hearing Protection Act of 2015 currently has 52 cosponsors from 26 states.

In the Senate, S.2236 has a new cosponsor, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. This brings to 2 the number of cosponsors in the Senate, the other cosponsor being Senator Mike Lee of Utah.

In Texas, agreements for the sale of real property fall under the statute of frauds. This means they must be in a written agreement signed by the person against whom enforcement is sought. This can be found in Texas Business and Commerce Code sections 26.01(a), 26.01(b)(4).

Under Texas case law, the agreement must contain the essential elements of the agreement so that the court can determine what exactly the agreement was without resorting to oral testimony.

Rep. Charles "Chuck" Fleischmann of Tennessee is the newest cosponsor of the House version of the Hearing Protection Act of 2015.

The House version of the Hearing Protection Act has 4 new cosponsors. They are Rep. Blake Farenthold of Texas, Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, Rep. Renee Ellmers of North Carolina, and Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho. This brings the total number of cosponsors in the house to 49.

The House version of the Hearing Protection Act is in the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations where it has been since last November.

The Senate version of the Hearing Protection Act of 2015, S.2236, has a new cosponsor. On January 20th, Senator Mike Lee of Utah became a cosponsor of Senator Mike Crapo's Hearing Protection Act. Senator Lee is currently the only cosponsor of the Senate version of the act. The act is currently in the Senate Committee on Finance where it has been since early November 2015.

The House version currently has 45 cosponsors, and among those 45, only one is a Democrat.

H.R.3799, also known as the Hearing Protection Act of 2015, was introduced last October in the House of Representatives with an identical bill, S.2236, introduced in the Senate in November.

Generally, the Hearing Protection Act would remove suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA), eliminating the $200 federal tax payment that is currently required under the NFA when purchasing a suppressor or "silencer", and prevent states or local authorities from imposing their own local tax as a replacement. Under the Act, suppressors would still be treated as firearms, but removed from the purview of the NFA. The effect would be to apply the same requirements for the purchase of rifles and shotguns to the purchase of suppressors. Purchasers would still be required to pass the NICS background check, but the expense and burdens imposed by the NFA would no longer apply.

We will post updates related to the Hearing Protection Act of 2015.

Click here for the text of H.R.3799.

House Bill 910 of the 84th Texas Legislature, The Texas Open Carry Law, is set to go into effect January 1st of 2016. The primary purpose of this legislation is to allow those in Texas who already have a concealed handgun license, and those who obtain a handgun license, to have the option of carrying openly in a belt or shoulder holster.

HB 910 (Acts 2015, 84th R.S., ch. 437, General and Special Laws of Texas) makes a number of changes to sections of the government code, occupations code, education code, family code and other Texas laws, but most of these changes (most) are not intended to be substantive. Instead, these changes adjust the current language of the laws to conform to the changes involved with introducing open carry into Texas. For a simple example, concealed handgun licenses are no longer concealed handgun licenses: they are handgun licenses. Many of the changes simply remove the word "concealed" from the law.

There are, however, also substantive changes to the law, some of which I will mention now. First, handgun instructors must be qualified to provide instruction in the proper use of restraint holsters and methods to ensure the secure carrying of openly carried handguns. Furthermore, they must provide instruction in the proper use of restraint holsters and methods to ensure the secure carrying of openly carried weapons as part of handgun licensing courses. This was not previously required.

Although instruction on the use of restraint holsters is required, licensed handgun carriers are not required to use them. This does not mean licensed handgun carriers can open carry however they wish. Handguns carried in the open must be carried in either a belt holster or a shoulder holster.

Additionally, Section 30.07, regarding prohibiting open carry on one's property, has been added to the Texas Penal Code as a sort of counterpart to section 30.06 which addresses concealed carry. 30.07 provides as follows:

If you are a man who is paying child support for a child who isn't yours, you may be able to terminate your child support obligations.

In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature recognized the problem of paternity fraud in Texas and passed Senate Bill 785 into law. The law, amending Texas Family Code §§ 154.006, 161.005, etc., and later amended in 2013 by House Bill 154, provides a legal remedy for victims of paternity fraud who were tricked into paying child support for children who are not theirs.

If someone made misrepresentations to you that led you to believe you were the father of a child, and because you thought you were the father, you either signed an acknowledgement of paternity or you failed to defend yourself in a court case establishing you as the father and ordering child support, then you may be able to file a lawsuit to terminate child support payments once and for all.

On May 12, 2011 the paternity fraud statute went into effect. Under Texas Family Code §161.005, a man can file a suit to terminate the parent-child relationship and end his child support obligations if he satisfies certain legal requirements. Generally, the man must have either signed an acknowledgement of paternity without first obtaining a DNA test, or a court must have determined he was the father in an earlier case in which DNA testing was not performed. The man must also have signed the acknowledgement of paternity or failed to challenge the original court case establishing him as the father, because he was led to believe he was the child's father based on misrepresentations made to him at the time.

As the law is written, it doesn't matter whether the misrepresentations were intentional or accidental. The mother might have lied and intentionally deceived the man, or she might have sincerely believed the man was the father. It wouldn't make a difference. The law is also silent when it comes to who made the misrepresentations. It could have been the mother, a family member, a friend, or someone else.

Once the Petition is filed, the court will hold a pretrial hearing. At the pretrial hearing, if the man establishes a meritorious prima facie case, then the court will order a DNA test of the man and the child. If the DNA test results prove the man is not the father of the child, then the court will order the parent child relationship (and child support payments) terminated. If the DNA test results establish the man is the father of the child, the man may have the option of a second DNA test to be certain there wasn't a mistake.

Currently, a victim of paternity fraud must file his lawsuit within two years from the time he becomes aware of the facts which indicate he is not the father of the child. If he doesn't meet this deadline, then he loses forever the protection afforded him in §161.005. Therefore, it is essential for any man who thinks he is the victim of paternity fraud to contact a lawyer immediately before his rights are lost. For victims of paternity fraud, every day of delay means more money wrongfully taken.

In response to the recent legislation passed by the Texas Legislature which makes it legal for college students with Texas CHL licenses to carry on campus, Southern Methodist University is holding a Campus Carry Debate on Tuesday, December 1st at 7 P.M.  The debate will take place at Umphree Lee Room 241.

Under Texas law, a surviving spouse has a life estate in the marital homestead. This life estate gives the surviving spouse a right to live there for so long as she lives or until she chooses to move out.

First, what is a marital homestead? Generally, the marital homestead is real property and any improvements placed on it that's used by a married couple as their home. What qualifies as a homestead depends on whether the real property is urban or rural. Urban areas are those which are located within a municipality's limits, extraterritorial jurisdiction, or platted subdivision; have a police force and either a paid or volunteer fire department; and have at least 3 of the following services through a municipality: electric, water, sewer, storm sewer, and natural gas. Homesteads located in urban areas, urban homesteads, are limited to 10 acres. For more on the definitions of urban homestead and rural homestead, see Article 16, Section 51 of the Texas Constitution; Tex. Prop. Code §41.002(a).

If the father was married at the time of his death, then his surviving spouse has a right to continue living in the home for so long as she chooses. Tex. Const. art. 16, §52; Tex. Est. Code §102.005. The fact that the father left the property to his child doesn't change this. See Tex. Est. Code §102.002.

Despite the protections from forced sale provided by the Texas Constitution, Property Code, and Estates Code, there are certain circumstances under which a forced sale is possible under Texas law. These and other legal options should be discussed in private with an attorney.

In Texas, your child is considered a minor until he turns 18 or is emancipated. Until this happens, you are generally legally responsible for him. This includes his attending school, damage he causes to others' property, etc.  

If your minor child wants to move out and you approve of this, then your child may file a petition to remove the disabilities of minority under Texas Family Code section 31.001 et seq. in your local family district court or other appropriate court. This petition must be verified by a parent, but not necessarily both parents. The petition to remove the disabilities of minority must  also provide 1) the name, age, and place of residence of the child, 2) the name and place of residence of each living parent, 3) the name and place of residence of the guardian of the person and the guardian of the estate, if any, 4) the name and place of residence of the managing conservator, if any, 5) the reasons why removal would be in the best interest of the minor, and 6) the purposes for which removal is requested. The court will then appoint an attorney to represent your child. If the court determines that emancipation is in the best interests of your child, then the court will order him emancipated. At this point, your child is considered an adult, and you're no longer legally liable for your child's decisions.

If your child under 17 moves out without your permission (runs away), this would be considered a status offense. The police could forcefully return your child to your home. After multiple incidents, your child could be considered a habitual runaway, and the state might get involved. Adults in Texas who allow a runaway child to live with them face charges of harboring a runaway under the Texas Penal Code among other charges.

The Court in reaching its opinion, noted other changes in the institution of marriage such as the decline of arranged marriages, invalidation of bans on interracial marriage and use of contraception, and abandonment of the law of coverture. Referring to other fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment that, under our current jurisprudence, extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices defining personal identity and beliefs, The Court held that The Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state.

Read the Full Opinion Here.

 Is privacy dead? With today's frequent advances in technology, commentators on television and radio often opine on the "death of privacy". Their reasoning is usually something to the effect that, because so much technology that enables individuals, organizations, and the government to spy on us is readily available, privacy is dead, or at least dying. Spy satellites, drones, thermal imaging cameras, listening devices, spy cameras, GPS in our cell phones, NSA spy programs, etc. all signal the end of privacy. 

THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY:

I won't endeavor to define privacy here; I think we all have the same general understanding of what privacy is, what it means. But, what is the right to privacy? Most people who read this article probably don't realize that the right to privacy does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Nor does the right to privacy appear in the Declaration of Independence. Or at least, these words do not appear in the founding documents. So, where do we get this right to privacy as it is recognized today? 

The right to privacy, at least the term, is a creation of U.S. Supreme Court case law. That is to say it was first given legal recognition by the judicial branch through its interpretation of the Constitution and its meaning along with the intent of the founding fathers. Although the specific word "privacy" and the phrase "right to privacy" do not appear in the founding documents, it is argued that the idea is there; the right exists, and it was understood by the framers that the right exists. 

The Supreme Court of The United States has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby holding that a closely held private company cannot be compelled to provide health insurance benefits that violate the religious beliefs of the owners.

Hobby Lobby had objected to the requirement in Obamacare that would force them to pay for their employees’ abortive procedures. Hobby Lobby never objected to paying for contraception that would prevent pregnancy in the first place, but instead only objected to those treatments that would end a pregnancy after conception or fertilization had taken place.

The full text of Justice Alito’s 5-4 majority opinion is here in pdf format.

I’ve been asked whether filing income tax returns as married filing jointly can create a common-law marriage in Texas.  The short answer is no.

How you filed your taxes is only one factor a court might consider in determining whether or not you had a common law marriage. It is not sufficient on its own.

There are 3 (really 4) elements that must be satisfied to establish a common-law marriage in Texas.  Generally, you must have both agreed to be married.  Next, you would have had to live together (cohabitated) as husband and wife.  Third, you must have held yourselves out to the public as husband and wife.  Not to be forgotten is the fourth requirement, you must have done all three of these things at the same time.  See Tex. Fam. Code §4.401(a)(2).

Generally, the state will also not recognize a marriage that is specifically prohibited or that is against public policy.  Examples would include incest or underage marriages.  See Tex. Fam. Code §§6.201-6.206.

Did you both intend to be married?  Did you live together as a married couple would?  Did you introduce each other at social events as husband and wife? Did you wear wedding rings? Did friends think you were married or consider the two of you to be married? Filing your taxes as married is certainly evidence of your agreement and intent to be married, but that is only one factor the court considers.

Let’s begin with some unfortunate truths.  Although many couples begin their marriages in love and with the best intentions, roughly half of marriages in the United States result in divorce.  For a married couple with a child, even the most civil and amicable of divorces will worry and frustrate their young child.

EARTH-SHATTERING CHANGE:

Children of divorcing parents are confronted with issues such as change and loss.  They may wonder where they will live, where they will go to school, whether they will lose their friends, whether they will lose their mother or their father, whether the divorce is their fault, whether mommy and daddy still love each other, and whether mommy and daddy still love them.  They will likely experience feelings of nervousness, worry, self-doubt, and insecurity.

All children are different, and thus, they react differently.  The child of a divorcing couple may act out by becoming more mischievous and defiant, or he may become more clingy and in need of attention.   The child might be openly sad or angry, or more isolated, quiet, and withdrawn.

WHAT CAN PARENTS DO?  Read more to find out.