Property Valuation and Division

As part of any divorce, the court must divide the community estate in a manner it deems to be just and right, having due regard for the rights of the parties and any children of the marriage. Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001. To complete this task, the trial court needs to be presented with values of the parties’ assets and liabilities. See Cervenka v. Cervenka, 672 S.W.3d 814, 818 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2023, no pet.); Fuentes v. Zaragoza, 555 S.W.3d 141, 164–65 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, no pet.); Finn v. Finn, 658 S.W.2d 735, 746–47 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.).

In most cases, the value given to a specific asset or liability should be determined as of the date the marriage is dissolved or as close to that date as possible. E.g., In re Marriage of C.A.S., 405 S.W.3d 373, 385 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013, no pet.). Generally, property should be valued according to its fair market value. Mandell v. Mandell, 310 S.W.3d 531, 536 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010, pet. denied). The value of the spouses’ marital property is a question of fact. See Tex. Fam. Code § 6.711(a).

Each spouse has the burden to present evidence of the value of his or her marital property. See Delgado v. Delgado, 587 S.W.3d 450, 455 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2019, no pet.). If the respondent does not file an answer in the suit, the petitioner must still present evidence to support the community estate's composition and its just and right division. Fuentes v. Zaragoza, 555 S.W.3d 141, 162–63 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, no pet.). Expert testimony can be used to prove the value of marital property. See Tex. R. Evid. 702, 703. However, expert testimony may not be necessary. See Mata v. Mata, 710 S.W.2d 756, 758 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 1986, no writ); see also Banker v. Banker, 517 S.W.3d 863, 871 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2017, pet. denied).

A division of the parties’ community estate must be based on values that are admitted into evidence. Martin v. Martin, 797 S.W.2d 347, 351 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1990, no writ). If both parties are present and only one spouse presents evidence of value, then the court has no reason not to accept that lone valuation. See Hurt v. Hurt, No. 14-23-00414-CV, 2025 WL 1982875, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2025, no pet.) (mem. op.) (wife disputed husband’s value but offered no competing value); see also Eudaric v. Ynganeh, No. 05-24-00489-CV, 2025 WL 2346149 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2025, no pet. h.) (mem. op.) (court relied on husband’s exhibit of county tax appraisal when no other evidence presented).

After a decree is rendered, only on specific request is the trial court required to provide written findings of the values of all assets, liabilities, claims, and offsets on which disputed evidence has been presented. Tex. Fam. Code § 6.711; see also Hurt, 2025 WL 1982875, at 3. When no disputed evidence is presented at trial, there is no reason for the trial court to provide a finding. Hurt, 2025 WL 1982875, at 3. If the appealing party is not forced to guess at the reasons for the court’s decision—because there was only one viewpoint offered—the party is note entitled to findings. Id.; Tex. Fam. Code § 6.711.

If a party requests findings solely based on the Rules of Civil Procedure and fails to specifically request findings available under Section 6.711, the party waives his right to those findings. See Moore v. Moore, 383 S.W.3d 190, 200–01 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, pet. denied). If the party properly references Section 6.711 in his request for findings, but the court signs findings that do not include 6.711 findings, a party will waive his right to the missing findings if he does not timely (within 10 days) request additional or amended findings. Tex. R. Civ. P. 298; Hamilton v. Hamilton, No. 02-19-00211-CV, 2020 WL 6498528, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Obtaining findings is critically important in an appeal of the division of property in a divorce decree because without findings on the value of the parties’ community “pie” and value of the complained “slices” awarded to each party, the appellate court will not be able to determine whether harm occurred and will most likely affirm the trial court’s just and right division. See e.g., Sandone v. Miller-Sandone, 116 S.W.3d 204, 207–08 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, no pet.).

Checklist:

• If your client does not agree with the other side’s valuation of something, don’t just argue that the valuation is wrong, present your client’s proposed value at trial, preferably with supporting evidence, documents, or experts, as needed.

• Once trial is over, if your client does not like the ruling (or even maybe doesn’t like the ruling), request findings pursuant to Texas Family Code Section 6.711 within 20 days of the decree being signed. (And don’t forget your notice of past-due findings). That deadline passes quickly, so it is better to make the request and not need the findings than to miss the deadline and have to explain that to the client.

• If the signed findings don’t include all the values you need, make sure to propose your own findings within 10 days in a request for additional or amended findings. Once you’ve done all of this, you have at least preserved all your client’s issues for appeal.