Sec. 154.012. SUPPORT PAID IN EXCESS OF SUPPORT ORDER. (a) If an obligor is not in arrears and the obligor's child support obligation has terminated, the obligee shall return to the obligor a child support payment made by the obligor that exceeds the amount of support ordered, regardless of whether the payment was made before, on, or after the date the child support obligation terminated.
(b) An obligor may file a suit to recover a child support payment under Subsection (a). If the court finds that the obligee failed to return a child support payment under Subsection (a), the court shall order the obligee to pay to the obligor reasonable and necessary attorney's fees, court costs, and expenses in addition to the amount of support paid after the date the child support order terminated. The court may order the fees, costs, expenses, and any postjudgment interest to be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in the attorney's own name by any means available for the enforcement of a judgment for debt. For good cause shown, the court may waive the requirement that the obligee pay attorney's fees, court costs, and expenses if the court states the reasons supporting that finding.
Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 363, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1023, Sec. 5, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2025, 89th Leg., R.S., Ch. 593 (H.B. 2524), Sec. 26, eff. September 1, 2025.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2005–2025 · leading case:
London v. London, 192 S.W.3d 6 (Tex. App. 2006).
London v. London, 192 S.W.3d 6 (Tex. App. 2006).
“Jeff asserts six theories in support of his claim for recoupment: (1) he made a request for and has a right to a money judgment; (2) the overage paid by Jeff may be applied towards his future child support obligation as recognized by Texas Family Code sections 154.012 and 154.”
in the Interest Of: Makis P. Moschopoulos, a Disabled Adult Child, 557 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. App. 2014).
“The Independent Action On September 20, 2010, Ana filed suit against Peter seeking to recover excess child support pursuant to TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. § 154.012. She alleged that the order for child support had terminated when she was appointed Makis’ permanent guardian.”
Michael L. Bird v. Angelique D. Ledesma (Tex. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Because the record supports a finding against Bird on one of the elements of his statutory claim—specifically, that he was “not in arrears,” see Tex. Fam. Code § 154.012(a)—we affirm. BACKGROUND Bird’s suit here involves child-support payments concerning A.”
In Re Bsh, 308 S.W.3d 76 (Tex. App. 2009).
“[7] Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.012 (Vernon 2008).”
in the Interest of B.S.H., a Child (Tex. App. 2009).
“014 would make it impossible for a court to recognize an obligor’s 7 … Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 154.012 (Vernon 2008).”
Jeffrey London v. Leticia London (Tex. App. 2005).
“Jeff asserts six theories in support of his claim for recoupment: (1) he made a request for and has a right to a money judgment; (2) the overage paid by Jeff may be applied towards his future child support obligation as recognized by Texas Family Code sections 154.012 and 154.”
— Tex. Fam. Code § 154.012(a) — 1 case
Michael L. Bird v. Angelique D. Ledesma (Tex. App. 2025).
“Because the record supports a finding against Bird on one of the elements of his statutory claim—specifically, that he was “not in arrears,” see Tex. Fam. Code § 154.012(a)—we affirm. BACKGROUND Bird’s suit here involves child-support payments concerning A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.