Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:The appellant, the Attorney General of Texas, appeals from a judgment on a bill of review in favor of the appellees, Justin Brady Alexander Maples and Steven Maples. Justin was born during the marriage of Maples and Rozella Alexander. In 1983, Alexander filed for divorce, alleging that Maples was Justin’s father and requesting child support. Maples did not deny paternity of Justin, and the trial court, finding Maples and Alexander to be the biological parents of Justin, ordered Maples to pay child support for Justin. The court ordered all support payments remitted to the AG for distribution pursuant to chapter 76 of the Texas Human Resources Code. As assignee of all support rights, the AG served notice of a $19,533 delinquency on Maples in 1994. Maples raised no contest to the notice, and a writ of withholding was filed with a request for its issuance. Four years later, after Justin reached the age of eighteen, the AG filed a motion to reduce unpaid child support to judgment. A $39,709 arrearage judgment was entered against Maples after a trial in which he was represented by counsel. On Oct. 15, 2001, after Justin’s 21st birthday, Maples filed a bill of review challenging the 1984 divorce decree and the related orders in the suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Maples alleged that DNA test results excluded him from paternity. The petition requested an order terminating his legal relationship with Justin and his obligation to satisfy the support arrearage. The AG excepted to Maples’ pleading, maintaining that Maples was required and failed to allege factually and with particularity that through no negligence of his own, he was prevented from asserting a meritorious defense to the original cause of action as a result of fraud, accident, wrongful act, or official mistake. The trial court sustained the special exceptions. In April 2002, Justin filed an amended petition for bill of review joined by Maples as a co-petitioner. Mimicking Maples’ original petition, Justin asked the court t 1. set aside the 1984 divorce decree as to the finding that Maples is Justin’s father; 2. terminate Maples’ obligation to pay any child support arrearages; 3. grant a new trial; 4. enter temporary orders placing a hold on any money received by Alexander; and 5. on final trial, order that Justin recover his costs of suit; that Maples’ child support obligation is paid in full; and that Maples is not Justin’s biological father. After a bench trial, the trial court severed the SAPCR and related issues out of the divorce and set them aside. The trial court additionally set aside the finding that Maples is the biological father of Justin and all orders rendered as a result of that finding-including child custody, visitation and support. HOLDING:Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Although the trial court set aside the prior judgment finding that Maples is the biological father of Justin and all orders rendered as a result of that finding, it did not address the merits of the appellees’ claims. The appellees asked the court to grant a new trial and then find that Maples is not the biological father of Justin. However, the court vacated the prior judgment without substituting a new judgment addressing the issue of whether Maples is Justin’s biological father. Thus, the judgment granting the bill of review in this case does not dispose of all the issues in the case. Accordingly, the judgment is interlocutory and not appealable. OPINION:Holman, J.; Dauphinot, Holman, and Day, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.