Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 154.069 (2026)

Net Resources Of Spouse

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 154.069. NET RESOURCES OF SPOUSE. (a) The court may not add any portion of the net resources of a spouse to the net resources of an obligor or obligee in order to calculate the amount of child support to be ordered.

(b) The court may not subtract the needs of a spouse, or of a dependent of a spouse, from the net resources of the obligor or obligee.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff. April 20, 1995.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: In the Interest of J.M.W., 470 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014).
In the Interest of J.M.W., 470 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) ("The court may not add any portion of the net resources of a spouse to the net resources of an obligor or obligee in order to calculate the amount of child support to be ordered”).”
Farish v. Farish, 982 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998). “(citing Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (Vernon 1996)).”
Butler v. Butler, 975 S.W.2d 765 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1998). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (Vernon 1996).”
in the Interest of J.C.K., a Minor Child, 143 S.W.3d 131 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a); cf. Knott, 118 S.”
In the Interest of P.C.S., 320 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (trial court cannot add any portion of net resources of obligor’s spouse when calculating child support obligation).”
In re JCK, 143 S.W.3d 131 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004). “See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 154.069(a); cf. Knott, 118 S.”
In re PCS, 320 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010). “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 154.069(a) (trial court cannot add any portion of net resources of obligor's spouse when calculating child support obligation).”
Kenneth Koenig v. Deborah Lynn DeBerry, No. 03-09-00252-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 17, 2010). · cites it 2× “" Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 154.069 (a) (West 2008).”
in the Interest of E.H.G, a Child, No. 05-15-00439-CV (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 23, 2016). “TEX. FAM. CODE § 154.069; see also Starck v.”
Ryan Squires v. Hillarey McHale, 691 S.W.3d 225 (Tex. App.—Austin 2024). “The trial court could have found that, while McHale’s monthly stipend from her new husband may incidentally benefit the children, the evidence showed it was not a source of income that McHale could rely upon to support her children in lieu of Squires’s child-support obligation.”
In the Interest of K.W., a Child v. the State of Texas, No. 04-24-00831-CV (Tex. App.—San Antonio Nov. 12, 2025). “TEX. FAM. CODE § 154.069. However, when there is a finding of intentional underemployment and “[i]n the absence of evidence of a party’s resources,” the trial court “shall consider relevant background circumstances regarding the obligor.”
in the Interest of J.M.W., No. 14-14-00135-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 23, 2015). “15 See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 154.062 (detailing what resources include and do not include).”
Tex. Fam. Code § 154.069(a): 7 cases
In the Interest of J.M.W., 470 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) ("The court may not add any portion of the net resources of a spouse to the net resources of an obligor or obligee in order to calculate the amount of child support to be ordered”).”
Farish v. Farish, 982 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998). “(citing Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (Vernon 1996)).”
Butler v. Butler, 975 S.W.2d 765 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1998). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (Vernon 1996).”
in the Interest of J.C.K., a Minor Child, 143 S.W.3d 131 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a); cf. Knott, 118 S.”
In the Interest of P.C.S., 320 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 154.069(a) (trial court cannot add any portion of net resources of obligor’s spouse when calculating child support obligation).”
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.