law-divorce-appeal-waiver-of-complaint | preservation of error for appeal | common error on appeal |

DIVORCE: PRESERVATION OF ERROR FOR APPEAL | WAIVER OF APPELLATE REVIEW

As to her claims regarding the court's valuation of her 401(k) and its refusal to reimburse her separate estate for
the $45,769.47 in loan proceeds from the sale of the Forest Dale property used to pay off the Mayhaw property
mortgage, Monica has waived these complaints on appeal.  
To preserve an issue for appellate review, a party
must bring her complaint to the trial court's attention by timely request, objection, or motion.  See Tex. R. App. P.
33.1; Swaab, 282 S.W.3d at 527 (concluding husband's failure to complain to trial court about provision in
divorce decree ordering him to assume 100% of federal income tax liability that arose during marriage failed to
preserve issue for appellate review).  If the matter is not presented to the trial court, the trial court has no
opportunity to rule on the issue or to correct its ruling if it is made in error.  In re Marriage of Lendman, 170
S.W.3d 894, 898 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2005, no pet.) (noting trial court has no opportunity to rule on issue or to
correct ruling made in error where matter is not presented to court) (citing Lewis v. Tex. Employers Ins. Ass'n,
151 Tex. 95, 246 S.W.2d 599, 600 (1952)); see also In re D.W., 249 S.W.3d 625, 643-44 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth
2008, pet. denied) (recognizing goals of civil trial and appellate procedural schemes include providing trial court
ample opportunity at every step of trial proceedings to cure its errors, grant new trial when needed, and allow
meritorious claims to be reviewed and corrected on appeal).
Knight v. Knight (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 29, 2009)(Hedges)
(
divorce property division, reimbursement claim)
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED & REMANDED IN PART: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges     
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Frost   
14-08-00424-CV  Monica Faye Knight v. Bobby Wayne Knight    
Appeal from 246th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court
Judge: Jim York   
A review of the record indicates that Monica did not present her complaints to the trial court regarding its
valuation of her 401(k) and its refusal to reimburse her separate estate for the $45,769.47 in loan proceeds from
the sale of the Forest Dale property.  She did not object when the court orally rendered its judgment at the
conclusion of the hearing or raise the issues in her motion for new trial.  See Swaab, 282 S.W.3d at 530-31
(finding husband's failure to object to imposition of lien on his separate property, or otherwise bring complaint to
trial court's attention, waived any error on appeal) [
Swaab v. Swaab, 282 S.W.3d 519, 524 (Tex. App.-Houston
[14 Dist.] 2008, pet. dism'd w.o.j.). ]; Stallworth v. Stallworth, 201 S.W.3d 338, 349 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2006, no
pet.) (concluding wife's failure to complain of discrepancy between trial court's oral rendition and final divorce
decree related to division of retirement proceeds waived any error on appeal).  Having failed to present her
complaints regarding the court's valuation of her 401(k) and its refusal to reimburse her separate estate for the
$45,769.47 in loan proceeds from the sale of the Forest Dale property to the trial court, Monica has
waived
these issues on appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1.

CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS  

HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE