In The Matter Of The Marriage Of Amy Morgan And Peter Morgan V The State

Key Facts

Issues

• Appellant contends that the trial court improperly ordered him to reimburse appellee for the costs of electing to receive disability retirement payments. The court addressed whether a divorce court can restrict a service member's right to waive military retirement pay in exchange for Veterans Administration disability benefits, and whether reimbursement provisions in the divorce decree are enforceable under federal law.
• Appellee contends that there was no meeting of the minds when the parties signed the MSA. The court examined whether the agreement complied with Texas Family Code § 6.602 requirements for irrevocable settlement agreements, and determined that the MSA met statutory requirements and was binding on both parties despite appellee's claim of lack of meeting of the minds.
• Appellee contends the MSA is ambiguous and should be set aside with the case remanded to the trial court. The court found that appellee failed to provide citation to pertinent legal authority explaining why the language in the MSA is ambiguous, failed to state which language results in two reasonable interpretations, and failed to state what those interpretations may be, resulting in the court overruling appellee's second cross-issue.

Holdings

• The court sustains appellant's first issue and modifies the judgment by omitting language that prohibited appellant from converting military retirement payments into disability payments and requiring reimbursement to appellee, as federal law gives the retired military member the right to waive retirement pay for disability benefits.
• The court overrules appellee's second cross-issue regarding MSA ambiguity because appellee failed to explain with citation why the language is ambiguous, failed to identify which language creates two reasonable interpretations, and failed to state what those interpretations may be.
• The court overrules appellee's first cross-issue regarding meeting of the minds because the MSA complied with § 6.602 of the Texas Family Code, was signed by both parties and their attorneys with prominent notice it is not subject to revocation, and the trial court did not allow evidence on the meeting of the minds issue.

Remedies

Legal Principles

• Under Texas Family Code § 6.602, a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) that includes a prominent notice stating it is not subject to revocation is binding on the parties as soon as it is executed. The court cannot modify an MSA to resolve ambiguities before incorporating it into a divorce decree, as such agreements are 'more binding than a basic written contract' and cannot be voided once signed absent fraud or coercion.
• A meeting of the minds in contract formation is determined objectively by examining what the parties said and did rather than their subjective state of mind. The court must consider communications between parties and circumstances surrounding those communications to determine mutual assent.
• Under federal law, a servicemember has the right to waive military retirement pay to receive Veterans Administration disability benefits. A divorce court cannot expressly or impliedly prohibit a retired military member from electing to waive retirement pay to receive VA disability benefits in the future, and cannot require reimbursement for such an election.

Precedent Name

• Wells v. Hoisager
• Cayan v. Cayan
• Ghrist v. Ghrist
• Matter of Marriage of Penafiel
• Loria v. Loria
• Milner v. Milner
• In re Joyner
• Freeman v. Freeman
• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Lopez
• Gillin v. Gillin
• Ex parte Burson
• Toler v. Sanders
• Limbaugh v. Limbaugh

Key Disputed Contract Clauses

• Clause requiring appellant to make appellee whole by directly paying the amount appellee's monthly payment is reduced if appellant waives military pay for disability pay. Also includes indemnification and reimbursement for losses and consequential damages under Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP).
• Clause prohibiting appellant from converting, buying civil service retirement, or otherwise modifying terms or payment structure of military retirement pay in any manner that negatively impacts appellee's payments. Trial court entered this provision in final divorce decree based on MSA.

Cited Statute

• Texas Government Code
• Texas Family Code
• Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

Judge Name

• Justice West
• Chief Justice Tijerina
• Justice Peña

Passage Text

• A divorce court cannot apportion military retirement pay which has been waived to receive Veterans Administration disability benefits. A trial court cannot expressly or impliedly prohibit a retired military member from electing to waive his retirement pay to receive Veteran's Affairs disability benefits in the future.
• Because the agreement complied with § 6.602, appellee's unilateral attempt to revoke the MSA was ineffective, and both §§ 6.602(b) and 6.602(c) required the trial court to enter judgment on it despite appellee's attempted repudiation. An MSA under § 6.602 is 'more binding than a basic written contract' because, except when a party has procured the settlement through fraud or coercion, nothing either party does will modify or void the agreement 'once everyone has signed it.'

Damages / Relief Type