Order entered April 15, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-11-00066-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.B.P., A MINOR CHILD

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-52013-05

ORDER

On March 20, 2008, Jimmie Prindle, Jr. filed a petition to modify parent-child 

relationship, seeking in part a decrease in the amount of his child support obligation with regards 

to A.B.P., a minor child. On July 26 and 28, 2010, the trial court held a hearing on the suit to 

modify parent-child relationship. On July 29, 2010, Presiding Judge Suzanne Wooten issued a 

Memorandum that granted in part and denied in part Jimmie Prindle, Jr.’s requested 

modification. Specifically, the Memorandum reduced Jimmie Prindle, Jr.’s child support 

obligation to $850 per month. On October 19, 2010, a visiting judge signed the Order in Suit to 

Modify Parent-Child Relationship, which ordered Jimmie Prindle, Jr. to pay child support of 

$850 per month. 

Thereafter, Jimmie Prindle, Jr. perfected an appeal to this Court. In his brief, Jimmie 

Prindle, Jr. argues the trial court ordered an amount of child support that varied from child 

support guidelines. In her response brief, Biborka Prindle argues the evidence supports a finding 
by the trial court that Jimmie Prindle, Jr. was intentionally unemployed or underemployed with 

earning potential to support ordered child support amount. Alternatively, Biborka Prindle argues

the evidence at trial supports a determination by the trial court that application of the guidelines 

would be unjust or inappropriate under the circumstances, that a variance from the guidelines 

was appropriate, and that a variance from the guidelines was in the best interest of A.B.P.

The Texas Supreme Court has stated the following regarding the trial court’s obligations 

when considering the issue of intentional underemployment:

To facilitate appellate review and to encourage consistency in the exercise of this 

discretion across the state, the trial court must make a finding of intentional 

unemployment or underemployment and its decision to base child support on 

earnings potential rather than actual earnings must be supported by the record.

Iliff v. Iliff, 339 S.W.3d 74, 82 (Tex. 2011). 

Furthermore, section 154.130(a) of the Texas Family Code provides the trial court shall 

make findings required under section 154.130(b) if the amount of child support ordered by the 

trial court varies from the amount computed by applying the percentage guidelines. However, the 

record before this Court does not contain the findings required by the Texas Supreme Court in 

Iliff or those required by the section 154.130 of the Texas Family Code.

Accordingly, this Court REMANDS this case to the trial court for further proceedings. 

On remand, we direct the trial court to:

1) Make a finding in accordance with the Iliff opinion, including whether or not it found 

Jimmie Prindle, Jr. to be intentionally unemployed or underemployed; and

2) Make any other findings and recommendations the trial court deems appropriate 

regarding the intentional unemployment or underemployment at issue.
Further, this Court ORDERS the trial court to direct the trial court clerk to file a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing the above described findings and conclusions with this 

Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated when records that comply with our order are filed with the Clerk of this 

Court.

/s/ DOUGLAS S. LANG 

PRESIDING JUSTICE