1 ... S ee Te x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 2 ... I n so m e tr i a l co u rtd o c u m e n ts an d i n h i s b ri e f, ap p e l l e e refers to hi m sel f as “ John . ” The t r i al court ’ s j udg m ent refers t o hi m as “ Juan Jo se, ” so w e w i l l c a l l h i m “ J u a n .” 

## COURT OFAPPEA LS SE COND DIST RIC TOF TE XAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 0 9 - 2 9 2 - CV I N T HE I NT E R E S T OF J . M . C. , A C HI L D

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 324TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I n t hree i ss ues , appel l antG abri el a Ergun appe al s t he t r i al court ’ s den i al of re tro a c ti v e c h i l d s u p p o rt, i ts d e v i a ti o n f ro m t h e fa m i l y c o d e ’s c h i l d s u p p o rt g u i d e l i n e s , a n d i ts d e n i a l o f h e r a tto rn e y ’s fe e s . W e a ffirm . B a c k g rou n d F a c ts G abr i el a m et appel l ee Juan Jose C . t hroug h e- m ai l cor respond ence aft er a m ut ual fr i end arrang ed t hei r i nt roduc t i on. In 2 00 2, Juan vi si t ed G abr i el a, 23 ... J u a n s a id t h a th e e x e c u t e d t h e p a t e r n ity a f fid a v its o t h a tJ .M .C . c o u ld obtai n a passportand s o th a tJ. M . C . ’ s bi rt h cert i fi cat e coul d nam e Juan as J .M .C .’s fa th e r.

4 ... Juan sai d t hathe request ed a D N A t estbecause he di scovered t hat he w as nott he onl y m an i n G abr i el a’ s l i fe and t hatt here w as a possi bi l i ty t hat J. M . C . w asnothi s so n. D ur i ng t he t r i al , Juan adm i t t ed t hatJ. M . C . i s hi s so n. 2 w ho l i vesi n Buch ares t , Rom ani a, for ab outt hree w ee ks . L at er, dur i ng G abr i el a’s t r i p t o t he U ni t ed S t at es t o see Juan, J. M . C . w as c on c e i ve d. Gab r i e l a g a ve b i rt h t o J. M . C. i n Rom a ni a o n Ju l y 12, 2003 . J u a n l e a rne d tha t G a b ri e l a w a s p reg n a n t an d b e g a n p ro v id in g h e r w i th m o n th ly fin a n c ia l a s s is ta n c e in v a rie d a m o u n ts b e g in n in g in F e b ru a ry 2 0 0 3 . In A ugus t2003 , Jua n e xec ut ed an a ff i dav i tac kno w l edg i ng hi s pat erni ty of J . M . C. L a t e r

in 2 0 0 3 , J u a n t ra v e le d t o R o m a n ia t o v is itJ .M .C . a n d G a b r ie la 3 for about tw o w eeks. Juan st opp ed provi di ng fi n anci al supporti n A ugu st 2004. Th e n e xtt i m e h e s a w J . M . C. w a s i n 2008. I n Febr uary 20 08 , G abr i el a fi l ed a Pet i t i on t o A dj udi cat e Paren t age, requ es t i ng t hat“ app ropr i at e o rders be m ade for supportof

t he chi l d, i ncl udi ng re t ro a c t iv e c h ild s u p p o rt ” ; J u a n a n s w e re d w it h a g e n e ra l d e n ia l a n d a s p e c ific deni al of

pat er ni ty. A ft er

t he t r i al courtdeni ed Juan’ s m ot i on t o di sm i ss f or an al l ege d l ac k o f

s ubj ec tm at t er

j ur i sd i ct i on, t he courtordered gen et i c t es t i ng, w hi ch revea l e d t hatJuan w as al m ost10 0% l i kel y t o be J. M . C . ’ s bi ol ogi cal fa th e r. I n Novem ber 2008 , s eve ral m ont hs aft er s he had fi l ed her

pe t i t i on, 45 ... J .M .C . w a s fiv e a n d a h a lf y e a rs o ld a tt h e t im e o f t h e t r ia l. 3 G abr i el a t ravel ed t o T exas, b ri ngi ng J. M . C . w i t h her . G abr i el a i ni t i al l y st ayed i n a hot el , and aft er bei ng i n Texa s for t en day s, s he ca l l ed Jua n on t he phone and t hen vi si t ed hi m several t i m es. Ju an i nvi t ed G abr i el a an d J. M . C . t o st ay at hi s ho m e ra th er

t han att he hotel . G abr i el a and J. M . C . st ayed w i t h Juan approxi m at el y tw o w eeks, and duri ng t hatt i m e, G abr i el a, J. M . C . , and Juan t ook a t r i p t o S an A nt oni o t o si ghts ee. W hi l e Gabr i el a w ass t ayi ng w i t h Ju an, t hey di sc us se d e nt er i ng i nt o a n o t a r iz e d a g re e m e n tre g a rd in g v is it a t i o n rig h t s w it h J .M .C . a n d c h ild su pport . Butw hen G ab r i el a’ s at t orney ad vi se d he r nott o e nt er

i nt o t he a g re e m e n t, G a b ri e l a to l d J u a n th a t s h e w a n te d to i n c o rp o ra te th e a g re e m e n t’s t er m s i nt o a co urt ’ s order . A tt hatpoi nt , Juan becam e upset , cal l ed t he pol i ce, a n d a s k e d G a b ri e l a to l e a v e h i s h o u s e , g i v i n g h e r te n m i n u te s to d o s o . O ffice rs a rr i v e d at h i s h o u se as G a b ri e l a an d J .M .C . l e ft. In F e b ru a ry 2 0 0 9 , th e tri a l c o u rth e l d a b e n c h tri a l o n G a b ri e l a ’s pet i t i on. A fte r th e tri a l , th e c o u rt d e s i g n a te d G a b ri e l a a n d J u a n a s J .M .C .’s

5 j o i n t m a n a g i n g c o n s e rv a to rs , g i v i n g G a b ri e l a th e ri g h t to e s ta b l i s h J .M .C .’s resi dence w i t hou ta geog raphi c rest r i ct i on. The t r i al courtordered Juan t o pay G a b ri e l a c h i l d s u p p o rt o f $ 5 0 0 p e r m o n th , a n d th e c o u rt re fu s e d G a b ri e l a ’s4

req u e st fo r re tro a c ti v e c h i l d s u p p o rt . F i n a l l y , th e c o u rtre q u i red e a c h p a rty to p a y h is o r

h e r o w n a t t o r n e y ’s fe e s a n d c o s t s . G a b r i e la file d n o t ic e o f t h is a p p e a l. R e tro a c ti v e C h i l d S u p p o rt I n h e r fi rst i ss u e , G a b ri e l a a ss e rts th a t t h e tr i a l co u rterred b y refu sing to order Juan t o pay ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rt . A courtm ay order a parentt o pay ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rti f t he parenthas notprevi ousl y been ordered to pay suppo rtfor

t he chi l d and w as nota party t o a s u i ti n w hi ch suppo rtw as o rd e re d . T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .0 0 9 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 8 ); M i l es v. Peacock , 2 2 9 S .W .3 d 3 8 4 , 3 8 9 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s t o n [ 1 s t D i s t.] 2 0 0 7 , n o p e t.). I n order i ng ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rt , t he t r i al courtm ustconsi der t he net res ource s of the o bl i gor dur i ng t he rel eva ntt i m e p er i od a nd w het her ( 1) t he m o t h e r o f t h e c h ild h a d m a d e a n y p re v io u s a t t e m p t s t o n o t if y t h e o b lig o r

o f h is p a tern i ty o r pro b a b l e p a tern i ty, (2 ) th e o b l i g o r ha d kn o w l e d g e o f his p a tern i ty or probab l e pat er ni ty, ( 3) t he order of ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rtw i l l i m pose an undu e fi n a n c i a l h a rd s h i p o n t h e o b l i g o r o r t h e o b l i g o r’ s fa m i l y , a n d ( 4) t he obl i gor ha s provi ded ac t ual su pport or ot her ne ce ss ar i esbe fore t he fi l i ng of t he a c ti o n . T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 3 1 (b ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 8 ); M ile s , 229 S. W . 3d a t389.5

The t r i al co urtha s di sc ret i on i n de ci di ng w het her t o a w ard ret roac t i ve c h i l d s u p p o rt. S ee T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 3 1 (a ); G arz a v . Bl ant on , 55 S .W .3 d 7 0 8 , 7 0 9 – 1 0(T e x . A p p .— C o rp u s C h ri s ti 2 0 0 1 , n o p e t.); In re G u t h r ie , 4 5 S .W .3 d 7 1 9 , 7 2 7 (T e x . A p p .— D a l l a s 2 0 0 1 , p e t. d e n i e d ). A c c o rd i n g l y , w e w i l l n o t re v e rs e th e tri a l c o u rt’s d e c i s i o n to n o t a w a rd re tro a c ti v e c h i l d s u p p o rt u n l e s s th e c o u rt a b u s e d i ts d i s c re ti o n . S ee G arza , 5 5 S .W .3 d a t 7 1 0 ; G u t h r ie , 45 S. W . 3d at727 (ci t i ng I n re G onzal ez , 9 9 3 S . W . 2d 147, 155 (Tex. A p p .— S a n A n to n i o 1 9 9 9 , n o p e t.)). To det erm i ne w het her a t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc ret i on, w e m us tde ci de w het her

t he t r i al co urtac t ed w i t houtreferen ce to any gui di ng rul esor pr i nci pl es ; i n ot her

w ords , w e m us tde ci de w het her t he ac tw asarbi t rar y or u n re a s o n a b l e . L o w v . H e n ry , 2 2 1 S .W .3 d 6 0 9 , 6 1 4 (T e x . 2 0 0 7 ); Ci re v . C um m i ngs , 1 3 4 S .W .3 d 8 3 5 , 8 3 8 – 3 9 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ); s e e I n re J . H. , 264 S. W . 3d 91 9, 9 23 (Tex . A pp. — D al l as 2 00 8, n o pet . ) . W e cannot concl ude t hata t r i al c o u rta b u s e d its d is c re t io n m e re ly b e c a u s e w e w o u ld h a v e ru le d d if fe re n t ly in th e s a m e c i rc u m s ta n c e s . E. I . du Po ntde N em ours & Co. v. Robi ns on , 923 S . W . 2 d 5 4 9 , 5 5 8 (T ex . 1 9 9 5 ); see Low , 2 2 1 S .W .3 d a t 6 2 0 ; J . H. , 164 S .W .3 d at 9 2 3 (e x p l a i n i n g tha t t h e “c o u rto f ap p e a l s m a y n o t s u b sti tu te i ts j udg m entfor

t hatof t he t r i al court ”) . A n abuse of di scret i on does not occur as l o n g a s s o m e e v i d e n c e o f s u b s ta n ti v e a n d p ro b a ti v e c h a ra c te r e x i s ts to s u p p o rt6 ... Jua n l i st ed J. M . C . asa dep end enton hi s 200 3 t hrough 200 7 i nco m e

t ax st at em ent s. 6 th e tri a l c o u rt’s d e c i s i o n . Bu t n a ru v . F o rd M o t or Co. , 84 S. W . 3d 198, 211 (T e x . 2 0 0 2 ); I n re B. R. , N o. 04- 09- 003 62- C V , 2010 W L 210534 6, at*2 (Tex. A p p .— S a n A n to n i o M a y 2 6 , 2 0 1 0 , n o p e t. h .); I n re B. B. R. , 188 S. W . 3d 341, 3 4 5 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 6 , n o p e t.). G a b ri e l a c o n ten d s th a t t h e tr i a l co u rtab u se d i ts d i sc reti o n b y refu sing to order ret roac t i ve chi l d s upportbe ca us e J uan “ had notprovi ded s upportfor t he chi l d for t he previ ous fi ve years, ” he knew about J. M . C . and had ackn ow l edged i n 2003 t hathe w as J. M . C ’ s fat her, he had cl ai m ed J. M . C . asa dep end enton t ax ret ur ns, an d he w oul d nots uf fer fi nan ci al h ardshi p by provi di ng s om e 6 a m o u n to f

re t ro a c t iv e s u p p o rtb e c a u s e h is m o n t h ly in c o m e e x c e e d s h is m o n t h ly expenses. Juan tes t i fi ed t hathe had been w or ki ng for a sm a l l c o m p a n y for seven m onths att he t i m e of t he t r i al and w as ear ni ng $2 , 30 0 (aft er t axes had been w i t hhel d) ever

y tw o w eeks. H i s w r i t t en st at em ent s recorded hi s m onthl y net i nc om e a tt he t i m e o f t r i a l a s $4, 746 a nd h i s m on t hl y e xp e ns e s a t$3, 357. In 2 0 0 5 , J u a n e a rn e d b e tw e e n $ 3 4 ,0 0 0 a n d $ 3 5 ,0 0 0 . J u a n ’s 2 0 0 6 ta x fo rm show s a s al ar

y of approxi m at el y $3 7, 00 0. Juan’ s gross i ncom e i n 2 00 7 w as7

$6 0, 20 8. I n 2 00 8, how ever , h e ch anged j obs, res ul t i ng i n bei ng un em pl oyed i n M a y a n d e a rn i n g a p p ro x i m a te l y $ 4 4 ,0 0 0 fo r th e y e a r. W hi l e Jua n di d not us e t hes e res ource s t o gi ve m one y t o G abri el a for J. M . C. ’ s su pp ortfor a s ub s t a nt i a l a m ou nto f t he t i m e b e tw e e n J. M . C. ’ s 2003 bi rt h a nd t he t r i a l c ou rt ’ s 2009 j ud gm e nt , from Fe brua r y t o N ovem ber

2003, J u a n s e n t G a b ri e l a $ 3 ,7 0 0 , w h i c h d o e s n o t i n c l u d e m o re th a n $ 3 0 0 i n W e s te rn U n io n ’s s e r

v ic e c h a rg e s t h a th e a ls o p a id d u r in g t h o s e m o n t h s . S t a rt in g in D ecem ber

20 03 and endi ng i n A ugu st20 04 , he al l ow ed G abr i el a t o w i t hdraw $ 4 ,7 6 0 .1 7 d ire c t ly fro m h is b a n k a c c o u n t . A ls o , J u a n t e s t ifie d t h a td u r in g h is st ay i n R om ani a i n 2 00 3, he provi ded G abr i el a w i th ad di t i onal fi nanci al a s s i s ta n c e o f m o re th a n $ 1 ,0 0 0 . J u a n ’s p a y m e n t o f s o m e o f J .M .C .’s e x p e n s e s d u r in g G a b r ie la ’s p re g n a n c y a n d t h e e a r ly p a rto f J .M .C .’ s life c o u ld h a v e su p p o rt e d the tr i a l co u rt ’s refu sa l to o rde r re tro a c ti v e ch i l d su p p o rt . S ee T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 3 1 (b )(4 ); G a rza , 55 S . W . 3d a t711 (u p h o l d i n g th e tri a l c o u rt’s d e n i a l o f re tro a c ti v e c h i l d s u p p o rt b e c a u s e th e re c o rd i ndi ca t ed “t hatt he j udge co ns i dered t he $2, 000 gi ven by app el l ee pr i or t o t he bi rt h of t he chi l d, ” and t he t r i al court c o u l d h a v e deci ded “t hatappel l ee had a l re a d y c o n tri b u te d e n o u g h m o n e y fo r s u p p o rt” ); G u t h r ie , 45 S . W . 3d a t729 (h o ld in g t h a ta fa t h e r’s v o lu n t a r y p a y m e n to f

s o m e e x p e n s e s fo r

t h e c h ild c o u ld h a v e fa c to re d i n to th e tri a l c o u rt’s d e c i s i o n t o d e n y re tro a c ti v e c h i l d s u p p o rt7 ... G abr i el a al so sai d t hatal t hou gh Ju an senth er $ 10 0 t o buy the vi sa, “t he pl ane t i ck etw asver y expe ns i ve” and she w as“ afrai d t o t rave l . . . from R o m a n i a to h e re w i th a o n e -y e a r-o l d b a b y .” 8 eve n t hough t he pay m entdi d notequal t he am ountt hatw oul d ha ve bee n due u n d e r s ta tu to ry g u i d e l i n e s ); s e e a l s o Ra n d o l p h v . Ra n d o l ph , N o. 1 4 -0 4 -0 0 1 8 0 -C V , 2 0 0 5 W L 2 2 7 6 8 7 3 , a t * 2 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D i s t.] 20 05 , no pet . ) (m em . op. ) (“[ E] ven i f t he am oun to f v o l untar y suppo rtw as l i m i te d , th e tri a l c o u rt a c te d w i th i n i ts d i s c re ti o n i f i t d e n i e d re tro a c ti v e s u p p o rt bec aus e Ran dy h ad pai d som e v o l u n ta r[y ] su p p o rt.” ). Ju a n di d no tg i ve Gab r i e l a fi na nc i a l a s s i st ance a ft e r Aug us t2004 . A tt r i al , he ass ert ed tw o rea so ns t hathe s t oppe d gi vi ng t he su pport . Fi rst , he s a i d th a t G a b ri e l a re fu s e d to b ri n g J .M .C . to th e U n i te d S ta te s d e s p i te J u a n ’s sendi ng G abr i el a som e m oney to purchase J. M . C . ’ s vi sa and al l ow i ng her t o use h is b a n k c a rd t o p u rc h a s e a p la n e t ic k e t . S e c o n d , h e c o n t e n d e d t h a tG a b r ie la fai l ed t o gi ve hi m pho ne num bers t hathe coul d cal l t o confi rm t hatJ. M . C . w as st i l l l i vi ng w i t h her . G abr i el a, on t he ot her hand, sai d t hatJuan di d not gi ve her m o n e y to b u y a p l a n e ti c k e t, a n d s h e al l eged t hatJuan st opp ed gi vi ng her 7 fi nan ci al s upportbe ca us e, ac cordi ng t o w hathe t ol d her i n a co nve rsa t i on, he w as unem pl oyed an d t he l ow costof l i vi ng i n R om ani a m ade t he am oun tt hat he had al rea dy p rovi ded “ eno ug h. ” Thus , t he rec ord c ont ai ns co nfl i ct i ng8 ... S o m e o f th e e v i d e n c e d e s c ri b e d b e l o w , w h i c h c o n c e rn s G a b ri e l a ’s

i n c o m e a n d J u a n ’s a n ti c i p a te d tra v e l e x p e n s e s to s e e J .M .C ., m a y a l s o s u p p o rt t h e t r ia l c o u rt ’s d e c is io n t o n o ta w a rd re t ro a c t iv e s u p p o rt . T h e t r ia l c o u rtd id n o t sp e c i fy i ts rea so n s fo r de n y i n g su c h su p p o rt . 9 e v i d e n c e a b o u t w h y J u a n s to p p e d s e n d i n g m o n e y t o G a b ri e l a . T h e tri a l c o u rt m ig h th a v e re s o lv e d t h e c o n flic tin fa v o r o f J u a n b e c a u s e its p e c ific a lly a n ti c i p a ted tha t G a b ri e l a w o u l d n o t c o o p e rate i n fac i l i tati n g futu re v i sits b e tw e e n J u a n a n d J . M . C. Th e t r i al courtdi d not m ake an expl i ci tde term i nat i on abo utw het her ret roac t i ve chi l d s upportw oul d i m pos e a n und ue fi nan ci al ha rds hi p on Jua n. G abr i el a argues t hata ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rtaw ard w oul d not i m pose such a hardshi p because ( 1) Juan’ s m onthl y i ncom e exceeds hi s m onthl y expenses b y ap p ro x i m a t e l y $1, 40 0, ( 2) J u a n g a i n e d a fi n a n c i a l b e n e fi tb y c l a i m i n g J . M . C. as a dependent on h i s tax re t ur ns for fi ve years, and ( 3) i n Juan ’ s propo sed p a re n t in g p la n t h a th e s u b m it t e d a tt r ia l, h e o f fe re d t o p a y $ 1 2 ,0 0 0 in re tro a c tiv e s u p p o rt. B u t a s s u m i n g th a t G a b ri e l a ’s a rg u m e n t re g a rd i n g J u a n ’s l ack o f u n d u e h ardshi p i s correct , t he fact s descr i bed abo ve st i l l com pr i se at l eastsom e evi dence of subst ant i ve and probati ve charact er t o suppo rtt he t r i al court ’ s deni al of

ret roact i ve supp o rt . S e e B u tn a ru , 8 4 S .W .3 d a t 2 1 1 ; B. R. , 8 2 0 1 0 W L 2 1 0 5 3 4 6 , a t * 2 . T h u s, w e h o l d tha t t h e tr i a l co u rtd i d n o t ab u se i ts di scret i on by refusi ng t o o rde r such supp orteven i f w e m i ght have r ul ed10

d i ffe re n tl y . See Low , 2 2 1 S .W .3 d a t 6 1 4 , 6 2 0 ; C i re , 134 S. W . 3d a t838– 39. H avi ng c onc l ude d t hatt he t r i al co urtdi d notab us e i t s di sc ret i on by refusi ng t o aw ard ret roact i ve chi l d suppo rt , w e over rul e G abr i el a’ s fi rsti ssue. C hi l d SupportA m ount I n he r s ec ond i ss ue, G abri el a c ont end s t hatthe tr i al co urterred by d e v i a ti n g fro m s ta tu to ry g u i d e l i n e s w h e n i t o rd e re d J u a n to p a y c h i l d s u p p o rt o f $ 5 0 0 p e r m o n th . S ee T e x . F a m . Co d e An n . § 1 54 . 12 5 ( Ve r n o n Su pp. 20 09 ) . A s partof

t hi s i ssue, G abr i el a argues t hatt he t r i al c o u rtm u st m ake fi n d i n g s to d e v i a te fro m th e g u i d e l i n e s . S ee i d. § 154. 130 (a) ( 3) , (b) ( V ernon S u p p . 2 0 0 9 ); T e n e ry v . T e n e ry , 932 S . W . 2d 29 , 3 0 (T ex . 1 996 ) . Butupon pos t su bm i ss i on a bat em entof t hi s app ea l , t he t r i al co urten t ered fi ft ee n fi ndi ngs of fac tt hats t at e (am ong o t her t hi ngs ) t he fol l ow i ng: 9. The supp ortordered i s out si de of gui del i nes.

. . . . 11. The cos tfor

Fat her t o t rave l t o Rom ani a f or a w ee k f

or t he p urpo s e o f

v i s i t i ng w i t h hi s c hi l d i s a pp rox i m a t e l y $5, 000.

. . . . 13 . The add ed cost s for Fat her t o go t o R om a n i a at l east once a year

and t o pay for

addi t i onal t ravel expenses w hen c o m b in e d w it h t h e o rd e re d c h ild s u p p o rtw o u ld e x c e e d t h e c h ild su pportpa i d by Fat he r i f he w ere o rdered t o s i m pl y pa y gu i del i ne su p p o rt .11 14 . Fat her

does not[ have] suf fi ci entreso u rces t o pay gui del i ne chi l d s upportan d s t i l l t rave l t o s ee t he chi l d. The c ourtal so en t ered tw o c onc l us i onsof l aw rel at ed t o c hi l d s upport(am ong s i x to ta l c o n c l u s i o n s ):

5. U nder

[secti on 1 54 . 12 3( 14 ) of t he fam i l y code] , an a d d it io n a l fa c t o r

fo r t h e C o u rtt o c o n s id e r in d e t e r m in in g c h ild suppo rtout si de of gui del i nes i s t he cost s [ si c] of t ravel t o exerci se pos s e s s i o n o f a n d a c c e s s t o a c h i l d . Ch i l d s u p p o rt s h o u l d notbe se tatgui del i ne su pportbe ca us e o f t he cos t s of

t rave l i n order

for F a th e r to e x e rc i s e v i s i ta ti o n i n R o m a n i a . . . . 6. The ordered chi l d suppo rti s appropr i at e under C hapter 154 , Texa s Fam i l y C ode , aft er co ns i deri ng t he bes ti nt eres tof t he chi l d a nd t he cos t s of Fat her’ s t rave l t o e xerci se pos se ss i on of t he chi l d. Becau se t he t r i al courthas m ade t he fi ndi ngs t hatt he fam i l y code requi res w h e n a c o u rtd e v ia t e s fro m s t a t u t o r y c h ild s u p p o rtg u id e lin e s , w e o v e r ru le a p p e l l a n t’ s s e c o n d issu e to th e e x ten t th a t i t re sts o n the tr i a l co u rt ’s fai l u re to m ake fi ndi ngs. W e re v i e w a tria l c o u rt’s d e c i s i o n to o rd e r a p a rti c u l a r c h i l d s u p p o rt am ountunde r

t he sa m e abus e of

di sc ret i on s t and ard a s a d eni al of ret roac t i ve s u p p o rt. Se e I n re M . K. R. , 216 S. W . 3d 58, 61 (Te x. A pp . — Fo rtW ort h 2007, n o p e t.); I n re P . J . H. , 25 S. W . 3d 402, 405 (Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h 2000, no p e t.); se e also S m i th v . S m i th , 143 S. W . 3d 206, 218 (Te x. A pp . — W a c o 2004, n o p e t.) (ap p l y i n g th e a b u s e o f d i s c re ti o n s ta n d a rd to a tri a l c o u rt’s d o w n w a rd12

devi at i on from chi l d suppo rtgui del i nes) . Thu s, “[ w ] e w i l l notrevi se t he t r i al c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t m e re l y b e c a u s e w e c o n s i d e r th e a m o u n t o f th e c h i l d s u p p o rt aw ard ei t her

t oo hi gh or

t oo l ow . ” P . J . H. , 25 S . W . 3d a t405. T h e am o u n t of c h i l d su p p o rt se t b y sta tu to ry g u i d e l i n e s i s “ p res u m e d to b e re a s o n a b l e .” T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 2 2 (a ) (V e r n o n 2 0 0 8 ). T h e fa m ily c o d e c o n t a in s a g u id e lin e s t a t in g t h a ta n o b lig o r w h o h a s o n e c h ild shoul d pay chi l d suppo rtequal t o tw enty percentof t he obl i gor’ s netresources. I d. § 1 54 . 12 5( b) . A tt he t i m e of th e tri a l , Juan’ s m onthl y neti ncom e w as $ 4 ,7 4 6 . T h u s, the fam il y c o d e ’s g u i d e l i n e w o u l d b e $ 9 4 9 .2 0 p e r m o n th (tw e nty pe rc e nto f

$4, 746) . Th e t r i a l c ou rts e th i ssu pp ortobl i ga t i on a t$500 per m on t h, w hi ch i s 10. 5% of hi s neti nco m e (or

roughl y ha l f

of t he am ount s u p p o rte d b y th e s ta tu to ry g u i d e l i n e th a t a p p l i e s to J u a n ). H ow ever , “[ a] court m ay det er m i ne t hatt he appl i cat i on of t he gui del i nes w oul d be unj us tor

i nap propr i at e u nde r t he ci rcum st an ce s. ” Tex. Fa m . Code A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 2 2 (b ). T h u s , th e c o u rt m a y “ o rd e r p e ri o d i c c h i l d s u p p o rt pay m ents i n a n a m ountot her t han t hates t abl i sh ed by t he g ui del i nesi f t he evi dence rebutst he presum pt i on t hatappl i cat i on of t he gui del i nes i s i n t he best i n te re s t o f th e c h i l d a n d j u s ti fi e s a v a ri a n c e fro m t h e g u i d e l i n e s .” I d. § 1 5 4 .1 2 3 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 8 ); I n re M ar r i age of Bert ram , 981 S. W . 2d 820, 827 ( Tex. A pp. — Texa r ka na 1 9 9 8 , no p et . ) . To de ci de w het her t o va r y from9 ... S p e c i fi c a l l y , fo r su m m e r vi sit a ti o n , th e tri a l c o u rto rde red the p a ren ts

t o spl i tt he costo f

J . M . C . ’ s roun d- t r i p t i cketfrom Ro m ani a t o t he U ni t ed S t at es a n d to p a y the co st o f t h e i r ow n ti c k e ts to tra v e l w i th J .M .C . a n d the n b a c k to th e i r re sp e c ti v e h o m e s u n ti l J .M .C . i s o l d en o u g h t o trav e l w i th an es c o rt , rat her t han a parent , on a n a i r pl ane . I n a l et t er t hatt he t r i al co urts entt o t he p a rt i e s to an n o u n c e i ts d e c i sion , th e co u rtsta ted , “T h e re i s n o e a sy so l u ti o n to a c a s e s u c h a s th i s . I h a v e a tte m p te d to e q u a l i z e th e c o s ts fo r th e c h ild b e tw e e n th e p a rti e s a s m u c h a s p o s s i b l e .” 13 t he gui del i nes , a t r i al courtm ay con si der, am ong o t her fac t ors, t he age an d t he nee ds of

t he chi l d; t he abi l i ty of t he parents t o c ont r i but e t o t he su pportof t he chi l d; an y fi nan ci al res ource s ava i l abl e f or t he su pport of

t he chi l d; t he am ount of t he obl i gee ’ s netres ource s; t he cos tof t rave l i n order

t o exerci se pos se ss i on of an d a cc es s t o a ch i l d; ca sh fl ow from an y rea l an d pe rso nal prope rty a nd as s e t s ; a n d a n y o t h e r fa c t o r “ c o n s i s t e n tw i t h t h e b e s ti n t e re s to f t h e c h i l d, t ak i ng i nt o c ons i derat i on t he ci rcum st anc es of t he parents. ” Tex. Fa m . Code A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 2 3 (b ). The t r i al co urts pec i fi ca l l y rel i ed on J uan ’ s exp ens est o vi si tJ. M . C . ast he rea so n t o va r

y from the fam i l y c ode ’ s gui del i nes . I n t he O rder A dj udi ca t i ng P a re n t a g e , th e t r ia l c o u rt re q u ire d J u a n t o p a y c o s t s t o v is itJ .M .C . in R o m a n ia dur i ng J. M . C . ’ s annual spr i ng breaks and t o sh a re w i th G abr i el a t he annu al c o sts for tra n sp o rt i n g J .M .C . to the U n i ted S tate s fo r su m m e r v is i tati o n w i th Jua n. 914

A rou nd - t r i p t i c k e tb e tw e e n Rom a ni a a nd Te xa s c os t s be tw e e n $2, 300 a n d $ 2 ,4 0 0 (o r, a c c o rd i n g to G a b ri e l a , b e tw e e n 1 ,0 0 0 a n d 1 ,2 0 0 e u ro s ). Jua n s ubm i t t ed a docum entshow i ng t hati tw oul d c os thi m al m os t$5, 000 for tra v e l an d l o d g i n g for a n i n e -da y tr i p to R o m a n i a ( w h i c h w o u l d c o v e r th e l e n g th o f J .M .C .’s tw o -w e e k s p ri n g b re a k ). T h u s , fo r J u a n to s e e J .M .C . o n J .M .C .’s spr i ng break and duri ng sum m er vi si t at i on, Juan w i l l have t o pay m ore t han $8 , 00 0 p er

year (al m ost $ 5 ,0 0 0 for t he spr i ng- break t r i p t o R om ani a, a p p ro x im a t e ly $ 2 ,4 0 0 fo r h is ro u n d -t r ip t ic k e tt o t a k e J .M .C . b a c k t o R o m a n ia a fte r s u m m e r v i s i ta ti o n , a n d a p p ro x i m a te l y $ 1 ,2 0 0 fo r h i s s h a re o f J .M .C .’s round- t r i p t i ck etfor s um m er

vi si t at i on) . T ha ta m ou nti s m ore t han t he $ 5 ,3 9 0 .4 0 a n n u a l d if fe re n c e b e tw e e n t h e s u p p o rtt h a t J u a n w o u ld h a v e p a id u n d e r th e fa m i l y c o d e ’s g u i d e l i n e s a n d th e $ 5 0 0 p e r m o n th th a t th e tri a l c o u rt ordered hi m t o pa y. B u t t h e tra v e l co sts cu t b o th w a y s. A l o n g w i th G a b ri e l a ’s res p o n sibi l i ty to p a y fo r h e r s h a re o f a n n u a l s u m m e r v i s i ta ti o n c o s ts (w h i c h w o u l d to ta l m o re t han $ 3, 50 0 b ecause o f h er responsi bi l i ty t o pay for her ow n roun d- t r i p t i cket a n d h a l f of J .M .C .’ s ti c k e t) , th e O rde r A dj u d i c a ti n g P a ren tag e req u i res h e r t o pay for cost s t o t ransportJ. M . C . t o vi si tJuan i n T exas for t he C hr i st m as hol i day s onc e e ver

y tw o ye ars. Thus , ass um i ng t hatG abri el a s t aysi n t he U n it e d S t a t e s w h ile J .M .C . v is it s J u a n d u r in g t h e C h r is t m a sh o lid a y s , G a b r ie la10 ... A l t ernat i vel y, i n a ny y ea r i n w hi ch Jua n i s notent i t l ed t o pos se ss i on o f J .M .C . d u r i n g t h e C h r is t m a s h o lid a y s , m o re t h a n h a lf o f J u a n ’s $ 6 ,0 0 0 in chi l d s u p p o rtp a y m e n t s c o u l d b e s p e n to n Ga b r i e l a ’ s s h a re o f t h e c o s t s for su m m er vi si t at i on. 15 w oul d be res ponsi bl e for tw o round- t r i p t i ck ets eve r y tw o ye ars ata cos tof m ore t han $4 , 50 0. Th erefore, i n a year i n w hi ch t he t r i al court ’ s order ent i t l es Juan to posses si on of J. M . C . dur i ng t he C hr i st m as hol i days, G abr i el a w i l l pay atl east$8 , 00 0 ( $3 , 50 0 for sum m er

vi si t at i on and $4 , 50 0 for C h ri stm as v is it a t io n ) in t ra n s p o rt a t io n c o s t s , w h ic h e x c e e d s t h e $ 6 ,0 0 0 t h a ts h e w ill rec e i v e tha t ye a r i n ch i l d su p p o rt . 10 H ow eve r , t he t r i al co urt ’ s fi ndi ngsof fac t and co ncl us i onsof l aw s how t hatt he cou rtw asunc onvi nce d t hat G abri el a w oul d ac t ual l y pay t he vi si t at i on cost s as ordered. O ne of t he court ’ s fi ndi ngs st at es, “M ot her has been rel uct antt o c oope rat e a nd s ee m s unl i kel y t o ful l y c oope rat e i n s end i ng or br i ngi ng t he chi l d t o T exas for vi si t at i on w i t h Fat her so t hati ti s l i kel y t hat Fat her w i l l ha ve t o t rave l t o Rom ani a i f he w ants t o hav e a rel at i ons hi p w i t h t he c h i l d .” S i m i l a rl y , o n e o f t h e c o u rt’s c o n c l u s i o n s s ta te s th a t ” [c ]h i l d s u p p o rt sh oul d notbe se t at gui del i ne su pport bec aus e of t he cos t s of t rave l i n order for F a t h e r t o e x e rc is e v is it a t io n in R o m a n ia asw el l asan an t i ci pat ed l ac k o f c o o p e ra t io n o f

M o t h e r in fa c ilit a t in g v is it s w it h F a t h e r a n d c h ild .” [E m p h a s is a d d e d .]16

T h e t r ia l c o u rth a d a n e v id e n t ia r y b a s is t o d e t e r m in e t h a t G a b r ie la w o u ld not coop erat e w i t h Juan t o al l ow Jua n ’s a c c ess t o J. M . C . A s w e descr i bed abo ve, Jua n t es t i fi ed t hatG abri el a p revi ous l y refus ed t o br i ng J. M . C . t o t he U n it e d S t a t e s d e s p it e J u a n ’s o f fe r t o p a y t h e c o s t s o f

t h e t r ip . J u a n a ls o s a id th a t G a b ri e l a fa i l e d to g i v e h i m a p h o n e n u m b e r t h a th e c o u l d c a l l to c o n fi rm t hatJ. M . C . w as st i l l l i vi ng w i t h her . A l t hou gh G abr i el a’ s t est i m ony co nfl i ct ed w i t h Ju an’ s, aspa rtof our ab us e o f

di sc ret i on revi ew , w e m us tde fer t o t he tri a l c o u rt’s i m p l i c itre s o lu ti o n o f th e c o n fl i c t. S ee I n re Bar ber , 982 S. W . 2d 364 , 366 (Tex. 1998 ) (or i g. proce edi ng) (exp l ai ni ng t hata t r i al co urt“ doe s not a b u s e i ts d i s c re ti o n if it b a s e s i ts d e c i s i o n o n c o n fl i c ti n g e v i d e n c e ” ); G eorge v. Jep pes on , 238 S . W . 3d 463, 474 (Tex. A pp. — H ous t on [ 1stD i st . ] 20 0 7, no p e t.). I f, as t he t r i al co urt ’ s fi ndi ngs and concl usi ons seem to i ndi cat e, t he t r i al c o u rtd e t e r m in e d t h a tJ u a n w o u ld b e s p e n d in g m o n e y t o v is itJ .M .C . in R o m a n ia b u tG a b r ie la w o u ld n o tb e s p e n d in g m o n e y t o a llo w J .M .C . t o v is it Juan i n t he U ni t ed S t at es, t hen t he t r i al courtcoul d have reasonabl y accoun t ed for Jua n’ s exp ens esby reduci ng the am ountof hi s chi l d s upportfrom t he am ountrec om m end ed by t he fam i l y code ’ s gui del i nes . B ec aus e t here i s so m e evi den ce t o s upportthe tr i al co urt ’ s dev i at i on from t he gui del i nesba se d on Jua n’ s t rave l ex pen se s, w e h ol d t hat t he t r i al cou rtdi d notab us e i t s di sc ret i on11 ... W e al so not e t hatt he t r i al co urtco ul d ha ve dec i ded t o va r y from t he fa m ily c o d e ’s g u id e lin e s b a s e d o n G a b r ie la ’s fin a n c ia l re s o u rc e s t h a ts h e c o u ld u s e to s u p p o rt J .M .C . S ee T e x . F a m . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 2 3 (b )(2 ), (5 ), (1 5 ). Al t h o u g h Ga b r i e l a i n i t i a l l y a s s e rt e d a t t r i a l t h a t s h e h a s m o n t h l y e x p ens es of $ 1 ,3 8 0 a n d a n e t i n c o m e o f o n l y $ 6 0 0 (a fte r w i th h o l d i n g o f R o m a n i a n ta x e s ), her t est i m ony u pon cross- exam i nat i on show ed ot her w i se . For

exam pl e, G abr i el a had 14 0, 00 0 euros i n t he bank from t he sal e of l and t hatshe ow ned i n Rom a ni a . Th e i nt e re s tfrom t ha ts a l e p rov i de s Gab r i e l a w i t h a l m os t$1, 000 of ad di t i onal m on t hl y i nco m e t hats he di d notrepo rton h er i nco m e st at em ent . Gab r i el a al so j oi nt l y ow ns , w i t h he r m ot her, an ot her

pa rce l of in d u s t r ia l la n d t h a ts h e d o e s n o tliv e o n a n d t h a tis a ls o w o rt h a p p ro x im a t e ly 14 0, 00 0 eu ros. 17 b y o rde ri n g J u a n to p a y o n l y $ 5 0 0 p e r m o n th i n ch i l d su p p o rt . See T e x . F a m. 11 C o d e A n n . § 1 5 4 .1 2 3 (b )(1 4 ); B u tn a ru , 8 4 S .W .3 d a t 2 1 1 ; B. R. , 2 0 1 0 WL 2 1 0 5 3 4 6 , a t * 2 ; s e e a l so I n re S. C. S. , 201 S . W . 3d 882, 888– 89 (Tex. A pp. — Eas t l and 2006 , no p et . ) (hol di ng t hata t r i al co urtdi d noterr by redu ci ng chi l d s u p p o rti n a m o d i fi c a t i o n s u i tb e c a u s e t h e m o t h e r a n d c h i l d h a d m o v e d, w h i c h c a u s e d th e fa th e r’si n c re a s e d tra v e l c o s ts ). T h u s , w e o v e rru l e G a b ri e l a ’s s e c o n d i s s u e . A t t or ney’ s Fees I n he r t hi rd i ss ue, G abri el a c ont end s t hat t he t r i al co urterred by refus i ng t o a w a rd h e r a tto rn e y ’s fe e s . S p e c i fi c a l l y , sh e s u c c i n c tl y a rg u e s th a t s h e is ent i t l ed t o at t or ney’ s fees b e cause Juan “foug htj ur i sdi ct i on and l ost ; deni ed pat erni ty; an d de m and ed gen et i c t es t i ng i n s pi t e o f an ea r l i er

ac kno w l edg m ent of pat er ni ty. U nder

the evi dence present ed t o t he t r i al court , t he courtabused18

i tsd i s c re ti o n i n fa i l i n g to a w a rd a tto rn e y ’s fe e s to [G a b r ie la ].” G a b ri e l a ’s at t orney , M ar

y Ann Beaty, t es t i fi ed t hatG abri el a had ret ai ned he r i n 2007 and had pai d her

cl ose t o $ 7, 00 0 b ased on m ore t han forty hou rs t hatBeaty or her l ega l as si st antha d w orke d on t he ca se . Bea ty t he n de scri bed s om e o f t he p a rt ic u la r

a c t s t h a ts h e h a d t a k e n in t h e c a s e a n d s t a t e d t h a tG a b r ie la w o u ld o w e h e r

m o re m o n e y fo r

re p re s e n t a t io n d u r in g t h e t r ia l. I n sui t s af

fect i ng t he parent - chi l d rel at i onshi p, t he courtm ay render j udg m entfor

reasonabl e at t or ney’ s fees. Tex . Fam . C ode A nn. § 1 06 . 00 2(a) (V e rno n 2 0 0 8 ). T h e fa m i l y c o d e g i v e s th e tri a l c o u rtd i sc reti o n o n w h e th e r t o a w a rd a tto rn e y ’s fe e s . Le nz v. Le nz , 7 9 S .W .3 d 1 0 , 2 1 (T e x . 2 0 0 2 ); Bruni v. Br uni , 92 4 S . W . 2d 36 6, 36 8 (Tex . 19 96 ) . Thu s, w e m ustrevi ew t he t r i al c o u rt’s d e c i s i o n to n o t a w a rd a tto rn e y ’s fe e s fo r a n a b u s e o f d i s c re ti o n . B. B. R. , 188 S . W . 3d a t344– 45. Th e t r i al courtdi d not spe c i f y w hy i tdeni ed G abr i el a’ s requestfor an aw ard of

at t or ney’ s fees. W e agree w i t h G abr i el a t hat t he reasons she of fered coul d suppo rt such an aw ard, but w e concl ude t hat und er th e fac ts det ai l ed abo ve, t he t r i al co urtdi d notact b ey on d any gu i di ng rul esor pr i nci pl es — and t herefore d i d notabus e i t s di sc ret i on— by deny i ng t he aw ard, es pec i al l y i n l i ght o f t h e tr i a l co u rt ’s d e n i a l o f G a b ri e l a ’s req u e st fo r re tro a c ti v e su p p o rtan d i ts det erm i nat i on t hatG abri el a i s unl i ke l y t o com pl y w i t h t he cou rt ’ s order t o br i ng19

J .M .C . to T e x a s . See L ow , 2 2 1 S . W . 3 d a t6 1 4 , 6 2 0 ; C i re , 13 4 S . W . 3d at 83 8– 39 . Therefore, w e over rul e G abr i el a’ s t hi rd i ssue. C onc l us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d a l l o f G a b ri e l a ’s i s s u e s , w e a ffirm th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

T E R R I E L I VI NGS T ON CHI E F J UST I CE PA N EL: L I V I N G STO N , C. J. ; D A U PH I N O T and M C C O Y, JJ. DEL I VERE D: J ul y 22, 2010