AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed August 19, 2021 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01448-CV 

IN THE INTEREST OF E.R.D., A CHILD 

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court 

Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 380-51929-2011 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Nowell 

Opinion by Justice Reichek 

Father, appearing pro se, appeals the trial court’s amended order modifying 

his child support obligation to increase the amount he pays and requiring him to pay 

Mother’s attorney’s fees. For reasons set out below, we affirm. 

Father and Mother are the parents of E.R.D. In 2011, the trial court signed an 

agreed Child Support Review Order that established Father’s paternity, appointed 

Father and Mother as joint managing conservators, gave Mother the exclusive right 

to designate E.R.D.’s primary residence, and ordered Father to pay child support in 

the amount of $665 per month and to maintain health insurance for the child. Six 

years later, on August 24, 2017, the trial court issued an order in a suit to modify the 

parent-child relationship which placed geographic restrictions on Mother’s right to 
 –2– 

designate E.R.D.’s primary residence and increased Father’s child support obligation 

to $950 per month. 

Less than a year later, Father filed a petition to modify the parent-child 

relationship, which was later amended. In his amended petition, Father sought to 

decrease his child support obligation based on a material and substantial change in 

circumstances and to restrict the child’s domicile to the boundaries of the McKinney 

Independent School District. Mother filed a motion requesting the trial court deny 

the relief requested by Father. Both parties sought attorney’s fees. 

The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on July 19, 2019, and 

subsequently issued an amended order that denied the relief requested by Father in 

his petition to modify, granted Mother’s request for increased child support, and 

ordered Father to pay $1,194 per month in child support. The court also ordered 

Father to pay Mother $4775 in attorney’s fees. In response to Father’s request, the 

trial court issued separate child support findings pursuant to section 154.130 of the 

Texas Family Code. After Father’s post-judgment motion was overruled by 

operation of law, this appeal followed. 

In his first issue, Father asserts the trial court erred in modifying the “agreed 

support order” of August 24, 2017 that was based on a mediated settlement 

agreement. It appears he argues that there was not a material and substantial change 

in circumstances to warrant an increase in his child support obligation. See TEX.

FAM. CODE ANN. § 156.401(a–1) (if parties agree to child support order that deviates 
 –3– 

from child support guidelines, court may modify obligation only if circumstances of 

child or person affected by order have materially and substantially changed since 

date of order’s rendition). 

Whether the evidence supported a material and substantial change in 

circumstance, however, requires a review of the evidence presented at the hearing. 

See In re C.C.J., 244 S.W.3d 911, 917–18 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (trial 

court must examine and compare circumstances of parents and minor children at 

time of initial order with circumstances existing at time modifications sought). Here, 

Father has not filed a reporter’s record of the hearing. When an appellant fails to 

file a reporter’s record, an appellate court must presume the evidence presented was 

sufficient to support the trial court’s order. Willms v. Americas Tire Co., Inc., 190 

S.W.3d 796, 804 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, pet. denied). Accordingly, we presume 

here that the evidence supports the trial court’s order increasing the amount of child 

support to be paid by Father. 

To the extent Father appears to argue that Mother could not be awarded 

increased child support because she asserted there had been no material or 

substantial change in circumstances in her pleadings, his failure to file a record is 

equally dispositive. The trial court’s order states it is granting Mother’s request for 

increased child support. Without a record, we must presume this issue was tried by 

consent. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 67 (issues not raised by pleadings may be tried by 
 –4– 

consent and failure to amend pleadings shall not affect result of bench trial). We 

overrule the first issue. 

In his second issue, Father asserts the trial court erred in awarding Mother her 

attorney’s fees. Here, Father provides no legal authority to support his contention. 

“The failure to adequately brief an issue, either by failing to specifically argue and 

analyze one’s position or provide authorities and record citation, waives an error on 

appeal.” In re B.A.B., 124 S.W.3d 417, 420 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.). 

Accordingly, we conclude this issue is waived. Moreover, to the extent Father is 

relying on arguments presented by Mother or challenging evidence adduced at the 

hearing, as stated previously, he did not file a reporter’s record and we therefore 

presume the record supports the trial court’s order. We overrule the second issue. 

We affirm the trial court’s order. 

191448F.P05 

 

/Amanda L. Reichek/

AMANDA L. REICHEK 

JUSTICE 
 –5– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

IN THE INTEREST OF E.R.D., A 

CHILD 

No. 05-19-01448-CV 

 On Appeal from the 380th Judicial 

District Court, Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 380-51929-

2011. 

Opinion delivered by Justice 

Reichek; Justices Molberg and 

Nowell participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s 

Amended Order in Suit to Modify Parent-Child Relationship is AFFIRMED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellees Jennifer Lynn Jacobsen and Office of the 

Attorney General of Texas recover their costs of this appeal from appellant Chima 

J. Ugokwe. 

Judgment entered this 19th day of August 2021.