Non-cash compensation in a Texas divorce

Highly compensated individuals may have a laundry-list of deferred compensation awards going out over many years. Sometimes these compensation methods require negotiation transactions during a divorce that may or may not be legally permitted without full transparency. In most Texas courts, there are “standing orders” that automatically apply to every divorce that prohibit certain types of transactions. It is important to understand the marital assets in order to prevent the client from inadvertently violating one of these rules.

Some types of non-cash compensation include incentive or employee stock options, employee stock purchase plans, and restricted stock options. Understanding the nuances of each of these types of awards is critical and hiring a financial expert may be warranted.

Stock option exercise patterns vary but typically are exercises at least annually but can be as often as quarterly. Consider whether the client has the authority under the prevailing orders to exercise the options or execute a sale of the newly acquired stock. Having knowledge of the vesting schedule and marking the dates for discussion with the client may be critical to keeping the client out of hot water with the court. It may be necessary to preemptively file and set a motion for hearing to address these matters and get early permission to act.

It may be necessary to have a plan and strategy in place to advise the client in the event of market volatility, especially if the client is heavily invested in one particular stock.

Sometimes it may be easiest to seek spousal consent to the actions necessary to protect the marital estate. Reaching an agreement is usually less costly than litigating when possible.

 

Hat tip to Vincent J. Fiorentino and Alexandra Mililli for their article 6 Ways to prepare clients with non-cash compensation in the Family Lawyer Magazine.

 

Start up company valuations in divorce

Most business valuations in the divorce context are performed upon long-standing businesses. Valuing an early-stage start-up company poses some challenges. In 2013 the AICPA released a guide detailing a framework for assessing the six typical stages of a business’ lifecycle.

Stage 1: The enterprise has no product revenue, limited expense history, incomplete management team, and initial product development.

Stage 2: The enterprise has no product revenue, substantial expense history related to product development, and an awareness for business challenges.

Stage 3: The enterprise has made significant progress in product development, key milestones have been met, and product development is near completion.

Stage 4: Initial sales have been made but the enterprise is still operating at a loss.

Stage 5: Product sales have grown and initial financial success has been attained with positive cash flows and profits.

Stage 6: The enterprise has an established financial history of profitable operations.

Most business valuations are performed on a mature company well into Stage 6. But when valuing an early stage company, there will not be historical data to consider. Some indicators of value apart from traditional financial data includes: the company’s business plan, correspondence with investors, financial forecasts, management’s history of success in other companies, market studies and surveys, interviews with management,  expected pricing model, and what are the unknown factors that will affect value. Additionally, understanding the non-traditional methods of compensation that could affect a particular owner or investor’s value is important. For example, in some industries, it is common to offer stock options to investors in early stages which can dilute the ownership of current stockholders in the future.

Having a financial expert skilled and knowledgeable in valuing early-stage entities is important to presenting the client’s best position in the divorce case. An unfamiliar expert may over or under value such an entity and cause a problem for the client in the division of property.

 

Hat tip to David Witherspoon’s article Valuing an Early Stage Company in Marital Dissolution from Family Lawyer Magazine.

Evaluating a valuation report

Because business entities are often a large part of a marital estate for divorce, family lawyers and clients should understand how to review the report and spot issues even before hiring or relying upon the party’s own expert for review.

1.Professional standards and credentials – Along the lines of starting at the very beginning (channeling my best Julie Andrews), begin with an analysis of the qualifications and credentials of the person performing the analysis. There are three professional associations in the U.S. that issue valuation standards – American Society of Appraisers (ASA), American Society of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), and National Society of Certified Valuation Analysts (NACVA). Also, the Uniform Standards for Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) provides the accepted standards for all appraisals. Ensuring that the expert has one of these credentials will show a minimum quality standard for the credentials of the expert.

2. Clear Assignment – the valuation report should be clear on what the assignment is; in other words, what is the purpose of the report? The valuation methodology and the conclusion are driven by the parameters in the assignment. The assignment should contain information such as the subject property to be valued, the ownership characteristics to be valued, the valuation date, the purpose of the valuation, and the standard of the valuation.

3. Is the report comprehensive? Look for statements in the valuation report that indicate certain procedures were not performed because of a lack of data. Look for the following informationin the valuation as a quick checklist:

Identification of the property

  • Effective valuation date
  • Definition of value
  • Purpose of appraisal
  • Actual or assumed ownership characteristic such as marketability and/or lack of control
  • Basic company information
  • Economic and industry outlook
  • Sources of information
  • Financial statement analysis
  • Valuation methodology – income approach, market approach, or asset approach
  • Valuation synthesis and conclusion
  • Appraiser’s qualifications
  • Contingent and limiting conditions

4. Does the report consider alternate methods of value? Three valuation approaches are generally considered in an valuation – income, market, and asset approaches. A typical valuation report considers at least two of these methods of value. Each method should be close in value. If there are huge swings in the value indicated by each methodology, it could indicate an error in the valuation. These errors could include an assumption error or math error.

5. Are the financial projections reasonable? Most valuations consider the future financial projections of the business. However, these projections must be reasonable. Some considerations to look for in evaluating the reasonableness of the projections include:

  • Whether they present the most likely picture of the business in the future considering all available information
  • Whether they appear credible considering the historical performance, the industry, and economy as a whole
  • Neither too optimistic or pessimistic
  • Do not include upward or downward bias based on the desire for future performance.

6. Sources of Information – Is the report based on information that is known as of the valuation date? Use of outdated or old information would not be reliable as of the current valuation date and would be a red flag.

7. Bias – does the report show objective analysis based on reasonable methodology and credible data sources? Consider whether the report contains unsupported input that causes a swing in the conclusion.

 

Hat tip to Alina Niculita’s article Red Flags in Valuation Reports in Family Lawyer Magazine.

Valuation of company for divorce

Often in divorces, a spouse or both spouses may own a closely-held business. While the business itself may not be divisible in the divorce, the value of the business entity as an asset of the marital estate can be an important component to the division. There are several considerations at play when valuing a business entity for divorce purposes.

The first question is the gross entity value. This considers the total capital structure or the overall value of the operations without considering the impact of the cash and debt being carried. Investment bankers consider this value in determining EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) and revenue-based multiples. Basically, for the gross value purposes, the debt and cash are operational decisions and not relevant to gross value. Included in this consideration are the gross revenue figures, as well as asset values and intangible values such as entity goodwill and workforce in place.

The next consideration is the equity value. This involves the netting of the debt against the gross entity value.

Valuation of an entity for investment or purchase purposes differs from valuation in the divorce context. Investment considerations primarily use the gross entity value. On the other hand, for purposes of the divorce context, the net equity value is the appropriate measure. Most often, this is not a value that can be simply and easily calculated without the assistance of an expert in divorce valuation issues. The method of applying discounts to the gross entity value for lack of marketability or reputation of the individual owner are areas for much disagreement and will require expert testimony in most scenarios.

Hat tip to Sean Saari and his article All Company Values Are Not Created Equal in Family Lawyer Magazine.

Online impersonation in Texas divorce suits

Interesting article in Texas Lawyer this week about the effect of online impersonation having growing relevance in Texas family law. People are increasingly impersonating spouses, paramours, and others online out of spite or to gain leverage. In 2009, Texas made it illegal to pretend to be another person online to harass, stalk, or defraud someone. For example, it would be illegal to create a fake website in an ex’s name and provide personal details about sexual acts. The law says a person commits an offense if he or she, without obtaining the person’s consent, uses the name or persona of another person with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or threaten by (1) creating a page on a website or other commercial social networking site, or (2) sending messages through an existing website or social networking site. This offense is a third degree felony, punishable by 2-10 years in prison.

Distinguish these two scenarios, one illegal and one not. In the first, a husband learns that his wife frequents online dating sites and communicates with another man. In an effort to prove her guilty of cheating and to gain an advantage in the divorce, husband creates a facebook page as the other man, exports a picture of the man and puts it onto the page. Then, acting as the other man, the husband has a dialog with wife about getting together. This is illegal. On the other hand, consider that husband creates a website called “thisguyisahomewrecker”, posts the picture of the man and details the affair. The husband is not impersonating the man, but merely exercising free speech about the conduct. Assuming that the accusations are true so no defamation suit is viable, this conduct is not illegal.

Changes from 2018 and looking ahead to 2019 for Texas family law

2018-2019 change represents the new year 2019 three-dimensional rendering 3D illustration

The Texas Legislature convenes every two years, with 2019 being one of those. Each session, proposed new laws get introduced that will affect family law in Texas. It is expected that a bill will be introduced to remove no fault divorce and require proof of fault grounds for all Texas divorce and extend the waiting period to finalize a divorce (currently 60 days). Neither of these proposals are expected to gain much traction. Reform of the child protective services system will, however, be a hot topic for the legislative session given all of the litigation there has been criticizing how CPS handles matters ineffectively.

From 2018, most of the big changes in Texas family law came from the courts. The Texas Supreme Court clarified a conflict between the courts of appeals in various parts of the state on the right of a nonparent to intervene and ask for custody of a child. In re H.S. involved grandparents who sought standing to sue for custody due to the actual care, control and possession of the child for at least 6 months. The Texas Supreme Court gave a broader definition of “control” than some of the intermediate courts had been using, making it easier for a nonparent (like grandparent, step-parent, etc) to sue for custody.

Another significant change in 2018, also from the Texas Supreme Court, reinforced the binding nature of a premarital agreement. In re Marriage of I.C. determined that a clause allowing for forfeiture of all rights under a premarital agreement if a spouse challenged the agreement was a valid and enforceable provision.

The Texas Supreme Court has two justices with family law backgrounds, unusual in the history of the Court. The effect is that the justices are more comfortable hearing family law matters and are accepting discretionary review more often in family law cases. We expect this trend to continue for 2019.

 

New tax laws impact divorce

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed Congress last December and there is a lot of talk about how it will impact the tax situation for individuals. Few have considered the impact that the new law will have on divorce and child custody. (See  How Will the New Tax Law Affect Your Divorce? )

Much of the commentary centers around the elimination of the tax deduction for alimony payments. The new law eliminated the deduction for alimony payments from taxable income. Likewise, the recipient of the alimony no longer must claim the payments as income. This new law only applies to divorce finalized after 2018. For alimony orders predating the law, any modification of the alimony order requires a statement as to whether the new law applies for deductibility/income inclusion. While this sounds like a win for alimony recipients,  it actually demotivates a higher-earning spouse from agreeing to make alimony payments as part of a divorce settlement. Alimony payments were a useful tool in resolving divorces where one spouse was high wage earner and the other spouse was a lower wage earner. The paying spouse was motivated to receive the tax deduction where the receiving spouse would not be as heavily tax impacted. Additionally, the new law will effect premarital and postmarital agreements that predate the law because there is no consideration under the new law for agreements reached before the effective date of the law. The law applies based on the date of the divorce judgment.

Another issue arising from the new tax laws in the effect on valuation of a business interest in divorce. In many divorces, the business interest may be the main asset in the property division. However, the new law increase the cash flow of certain kinds of businesses due to lower C Corp tax rates (reduced from adjustable rates up to 35% to a flat rate of 21%).  If all else is equal, the effect of this should raise net after tax income for the difference in the taxes. The exact effect of this on corporate valuation won’t be known until a new business tax return is filed under the new law.

Additionally, for pass through entities, owners of the business may now deduct up to 20% of income defined as “qualified business income” without limit for taxpayers whose taxable income does not exceed $315,000 for married joint filers and phased out up to $415,000. If income is above that level, the deduction is limited to the greater of 50% of W2 wages or the sum of 25% of W2 wages plus 2.5% of the unadjusted basis of all qualified property. For valuation purposes, the TCJA has widened the differences in the tax rates for corporate entities versus pass-through income, which may require adjustments to some of the assumptions applied for valuation purposes.

The new law allows 529 plans to be used to pay for elementary or secondary private school tuition, not just college. There is no change in the tax benefits of a 529 plan, but for 2018, up to $10,000 per beneficiary may be distributed to pay for schooling.  This would raise an issue that needs to be addressed in the divorce settlement.

Personal exemptions have been suspended for tax years 2018 through 2025. During this 8-year period, divorcing parents cannot use personal exemptions for dependent children and do not need to negotiate over which parent gets to use the exemption. If the children are young enough, the exemption may return after the suspension period.

The TCJA significantly changed the child tax credit. It doubled the tax credit to $2,000 for each qualifying dependent child and make $1400 of the credit refundable. But, the credit phases out for married taxpayers earning more than $400,000. and, it expires in 2026. The phase-out threshold under the old law made the child tax credit irrelevant in many divorces, so increasing the phase-out threshold will make this a more significant issue.

The standard deduction has been doubled under the TCJA to $24,000 for married joint filers. The objective for this increase is to reduce taxes and simplify the filing process.Effectively this eliminated itemized deduction for most taxpayers. The limits on itemized deductions have been eliminated, which probably benefits higher wage earners. But the new law reduces the availability of the deduction for state and local taxes for individuals (but not businesses). So, for example, property taxes on a marital residence are deductible up to the cap of $10,000 for married joint filers, making much of property taxes on a high value home not deductible. The new law limits the deductibility of mortgage interest for loans originated after 12/15/17. It also eliminates the deduction for interest on home equity loans. This provision is set to expire after 2025. This increases the cost of financing a home by limiting the tax benefits.

 

 

Fault or no fault — that is the question

A client recently asked about divorcing her husband who was pending felony criminal charges. Texas is generally a no-fault divorce state. This means that one spouse may seek and be granted a divorce based solely on the irreparable breakdown in the marriage relationship without showing anything else. However, Texas allows for a fault-based divorce decreed in favor of one spouse, which generally only matters when immigration is an issue or when the property available to divide in the marriage is significant. One of the grounds for such a fault-based divorce is the conviction of a felony that results in imprisonment for at least one year.  Other fault grounds include cruel treatment, adultery, or confinement in a mental hospital for at least 3 years. It is important to note that fault grounds require proof of the ground and also proof that the grounds actually cause the divorce. In other words, it is insufficient to prove that a spouse was unfaithful during the marriage to get a fault finding. There must be additional proof that the unfaithfulness actually cause the marriage to end. The same would be said for cruel treatment or felony conviction. If the actions were tolerated for many years or ignored and the marriage continued, then fault grounds likely do not exist.

Overwhelmingly, most divorces are granted on no-fault grounds in Texas. The cost incurred of litigating over the fault grounds usually cannot be justified in the overall outcome. There has been movement among very conservative Texas legislators to negate the law allowing no-fault divorce and only permit divorces based on fault grounds. Although the simple concept of making divorce harder to get may sound like a good idea, no-fault divorce actually benefits everyone. No-fault divorce decreases the cost of divorce dramatically by providing one less issue to fight over. Think about it, to prove that a spouse is having sexual intercourse (the standard to show adultery), private investigators would have to be employed in every case. Further, for victims of domestic violence, having to provide proof and testify about the episodes of cruel treatment increases the emotional toil of the divorce.

House Bill 93 was filed in the 2017 legislative session to repeal no-fault divorce and require fault-based divorces in Texas. It was defeated, but many expect a similar bill to be introduced in the 2019 session. A survey by the Texas Bar association shows that 93% of attorneys are opposed to repeal of the no-fault divorce laws. 94% of attorneys believe that the repeal of the no-fault divorce laws would increase the attorneys fees and prolong the time it takes to get divorced. 64% of the Texas attorneys surveyed said that repeal of the no-fault divorce laws would give an advantage to a spouse opposing the divorce in the litigation.

 

Domestic Violence Awareness Month – What is Dallas doing about it?

Interesting article in the Dallas Morning News today about efforts to prevent folks convicted of domestic violence or abuse from gun ownership. Under federal law, anyone found to have committed family violence (aka domestic abuse), whether in a criminal proceeding or by way of a civil protective order, is prohibited from purchasing a gun. The identity of the person should be reported to the National Crime Information Center, which is the registry used for gun sales. Unfortunately, the lower level courts in Dallas County have not been reporting convictions. By the end of October, even municipal courts will begin reporting the identities and fingerprints of all people who are found guilty or plead no contest to Class C misdemeanor family violence charges. Class C cases involve verbal threats or physical contact that did not result in visible injury. No one walks away with more than $500 ticket. About 2,200 such cases came through the Dallas courts in the last three to four years.

The new action was inspired by the shooting at Sutherland Springs last year. The gunman had been convicted in military court of domestic assault, but it was not sent to the database. If it had been the gunman would not have been permitted to buy the gun that he used in the shooting.

Dallas council members previously approved $45,000 to buy three Live Scan Fingerprinting systems needed to secure info for the database. While this may seem small in the grand scheme of the City of Dallas budget, smaller cities will have a harder time bearing such costs.

Read the news story here: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/10/15/dallas-keep-guns-domestic-abusers-hands

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. The statistics about the common occurrence of domestic violence are astounding.

  • THREE women in the US are murdered every day by their current or former boyfriends.
  • 38 MILLION + people in the US have experienced physical violence by a partner at some point during their lifetime.
  • 4.7 MILLION women experience physcial violence by a partner every YEAR.
  • 20 people every MINUTE are victims of domestic violence.
  • 1 in 4 women will be a victim of severe domestic violence in their lifetime. 1 in 7 men will fall victim to severe domestic violence. 2 in 5 gay men will experience domestic violence.
  • 45% of women in violent relationships are also raped in those relationships.
  • Every 9 seconds a woman is beaten in the US.
  • 70% of women worldwide will experience physical and/or sexual abuse by an intimate partner during their lifetimes.
  • 98% of people who experience domestic violence also experience financial abuse.
  • Black women experience domestic violence at rates more than 35% higher than white women.
  • Only 25% of physical assaults are reported to the police.

Read more here: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/domestic-violence-statistics_n_5959776.html

Download a domestic violence fact sheet here: https://www.speakcdn.com/assets/2497/domestic_violence2.pdf

Download the fact sheet about Domestic Violence in TExas here: https://www.speakcdn.com/assets/2497/texas.pdf

How much parenting time do Dad’s get in Texas versus other states?

https://www.custodyxchange.com/maps/dads-custody-time-2018.png

Dads custody time 2018

I read an interesting study performed by Custody Xchange about parenting time state-by-state. (See How much custody time does dad get in your state?) Bottom line, their study showed that nationally a father is likely to receive on average 35% of time with a child by court order. Interestingly, 40% of states – 20 out of 50 – start with a 50/50 model for parenting time. For example, Florida has a 48 hours on and 48 hours off plan. Contrast this with Tennessee, who scored last of the 50 states, where a father is likely to receive about 21.8% of time with a child. In Tennessee, a father will likely receive a Friday to Sunday period twice a month.

This translates to about 183 days for dad in an equal state like Florida compared to Tennessee which gives an average of 80 days a year. That is a 100 day per year difference depending on the state lived in!

Texas scored close to the average, with fathers receiving about 33% of the child’s time. It was interesting to note in the study that when the 20 states that provide a start of 50/50 are eliminated from the study, Texas scored close to the top providing time for fathers compared with other states that do not provide equal time.

Last year, 20 states considered laws to make equal or shared co-parenting the presumed standard even over objection of one or both parents. (See More than 20 states in 2017 considered laws to promote shared custody of children after divorce from Washington Post.) Shared parenting, advocates say, replaces the “winner take all” attitude of custody cases. In one model, two parents enter a courtroom and at the end, one leaves a “parent” and the other leaves a “visitor”. In the other model, both remain parents even after the breakup of the relationship.

The visiting parent model came from old notions that mothers were better primary caretakers of children, diminishing the father’s role. The tide began to change in the late 1960’s and 70’s as women joined the workforce and roles at home began to change. The “tender years doctrine” favoring mothers has been replaced with a gender-neutral “best interest of the child” standard. Even so, judges still trended toward awarding mothers custody most of the time, making it unusual for fathers to be awarded custody of children in a contested case. Fathers rights advocates feel that more stringent laws imposing equal footing are necessary.

 

Here is the summary of Texas parenting time schedule from the Custody Xchange study:

Texas

Biggest county: Harris County

Source type: RL- Standard Possession Order

Year: 2018

Regular schedule: Weekends— On weekends that occur during the regular school term, beginning at [6:00 P.M./the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed] on the first, third, and fifth Friday of each month and ending at [6:00 P.M. on the following Sunday/the time the child’s school resumes after the weekend]. On weekends that do not occur during the regular school term, beginning at 6:00 P.M. on the first, third, and fifth Friday of each month and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the following Sunday.

Weekend Possession Extended by a Holiday— Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Standard Possession Order, if a weekend period of possession by Possessory Conservator begins on a student holiday or a teacher in-service day that falls on a Friday during the regular school term, as determined by the school in which the child is enrolled, or a federal, state, or local holiday that falls on a Friday during the summer months when school is not in session, that weekend period of possession shall begin at [6:00 P.M. on the immediately preceding Thursday/the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed on the Thursday immediately preceding the student holiday or teacher in-service day and 6:00 P.M. on the Thursday immediately preceding the federal, state, or local holiday during the summer months]. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Standard Possession Order, if a weekend period of possession by Possessory Conservator ends on or is immediately followed by a student holiday or a teacher inservice day that falls on a Monday during the regular school term, as determined by the school in which the child is enrolled, or a federal, state, or local holiday that falls on a Monday during the summer months when school is not in session, that weekend period of possession shall end at 6:00 P.M. on that Monday.

Thursdays—On Thursday of each week during the regular school term, beginning at [6:00 P.M./the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed] and ending at [8:00 P.M./the time the child’s school resumes on Friday].

Holiday schedule: Spring Vacation in Even-Numbered Years—In even-numbered years, beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the school’s spring vacation and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the day before school resumes after that vacation. Extended Summer Possession by Possessory Conservator— With Written Notice by April 1—If Possessory Conservator gives Sole Managing Conservator written notice by April 1 of a year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession for that year, Possessory Conservator shall have possession of the child for thirty days beginning no earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending no later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation in that year, to be exercised in no more than two separate periods of at least seven consecutive days each, as specified in the written notice [include if applicable: , provided that the period or periods of extended summer possession do not interfere with Father’s Day possession]. These periods of possession shall begin and end at 6:00 P.M. on each applicable day. Without Written Notice by April 1—If Possessory Conservator does not give Sole Managing Conservator written notice by April 1 of a year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession for that year, Possessory Conservator shall have possession of the child for thirty consecutive days in that year beginning at 6:00 P.M. on July 1 and ending at 6:00 P.M. on July 31.

Notwithstanding the Thursday periods of possession during the regular school term and the weekend periods of possession ORDERED for Possessory Conservator, it is expressly ORDERED that Sole Managing Conservator shall have a superior right of possession of the child as follows: Spring Vacation in Odd-Numbered Years—In odd-numbered years, beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the school’s spring vacation and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the day before school resumes after that vacation. Summer Weekend Possession by Sole Managing Conservator—If Sole Managing Conservator gives Possessory Conservator written notice by April 15 of a year, Sole Managing Conservator shall have possession of the child on any one weekend beginning at 6:00 P.M. on Friday and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the following Sunday during any one period of the extended summer possession by Possessory Conservator in that year, provided that Sole Managing Conservator picks up the child from Possessory Conservator and returns the child to that same place [include if applicable: and that the weekend so designated does not interfere with Father’s Day possession]. Extended Summer Possession by Sole Managing Conservator—If Sole Managing Conservator gives Possessory Conservator written notice by April 15 of a year or gives Possessory Conservator fourteen days’ written notice on or after April 16 of a year, Sole Managing Conservator may designate one weekend beginning no earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending no later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation, during which an otherwise scheduled weekend period of possession by Possessory Conservator shall not take place in that year, provided that the weekend so designated does not interfere with Possessory Conservator’s period or periods of extended summer possession [include if applicable: or with Father’s Day possession].

Other holidays: Notwithstanding the weekend and Thursday periods of possession of Possessory Conservator, Sole Managing Conservator and Possessory Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child as follows: Christmas Holidays in Even-Numbered Years—In even-numbered years, Possessory Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the Christmas school vacation and ending at noon on December 28, and Sole Managing Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at noon on December 28 and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the day before school resumes after that Christmas school vacation. Christmas Holidays in Odd-Numbered Years—In odd-numbered years, Sole Managing Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the Christmas school vacation and ending at noon on December 28, and Possessory Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at noon on December 28 and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the day before school resumes after that Christmas school vacation.

Thanksgiving in Odd-Numbered Years—In odd-numbered years, Possessory Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the Thanksgiving holiday and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the Sunday following Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving in Even-Numbered Years—In even-numbered years, Sole Managing Conservator shall have the right to possession of the child beginning at [6:00 P.M. on the day the child is dismissed from school/the time the child’s school is dismissed] for the Thanksgiving holiday and ending at 6:00 P.M. on the Sunday following Thanksgiving.

Child’s Birthday—If a conservator is not otherwise entitled under this Standard Possession Order to present possession of [the/a] child on the child’s birthday, that conservator shall have possession of the child [include if desired: and the child’s minor siblings] [possession of siblings on a child’s birthday is not part of the standard possession order] beginning at 6:00 P.M. and ending at 8:00 P.M. on that day, provided that that conservator picks up the child[ren] from the other conservator’s residence and returns the child[ren] to that same place. Father’s Day—Father shall have the right to possession of the child each year, beginning at 6:00 P.M. on the Friday preceding Father’s Day and ending at [6:00 P.M. on/8:00 A.M. on the Monday after] Father’s Day, provided that if Father is not otherwise entitled under this Standard Possession Order to present possession of the child, he shall pick up the child from the other conservator’s residence and return the child to that same place. Mother’s Day—Mother shall have the right to possession of the child each year, beginning at [6:00 P.M./the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed] on the Friday preceding Mother’s Day and ending at [6:00 P.M. on/the time the child’s school resumes after] Mother’s Day, provided that if Mother is not otherwise entitled under this Standard Possession Order to present possession of the child, she shall pick up the child from the other conservator’s residence and return the child to that same place.

Percentage custody for non-custodial parent: 33%

 

 

LexBlog