Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 1. THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE B. PROPERTY RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES · CHAPTER 3. MARITAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 3.007 (2026)

Property Interest In Certain Employee Benefits

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 3.007. PROPERTY INTEREST IN CERTAIN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. (a) Repealed by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768, Sec. 11(1), eff. September 1, 2009.

(b) Repealed by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768, Sec. 11(1), eff. September 1, 2009.

(c) The separate property interest of a spouse in a defined contribution retirement plan may be traced using the tracing and characterization principles that apply to a nonretirement asset.

(d) A spouse who is a participant in an employer-provided stock option plan or an employer-provided restricted stock plan has a separate property interest in the options or restricted stock granted to the spouse under the plan as follows:

(1) if the option or stock was granted to the spouse before marriage but required continued employment during marriage before the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed, the spouse's separate property interest is equal to the fraction of the option or restricted stock in which:

(A) the numerator is the sum of:

(i) the period from the date the option or stock was granted until the date of marriage; and

(ii) if the option or stock also required continued employment following the date of dissolution of the marriage before the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed, the period from the date of dissolution of the marriage until the date the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed; and

(B) the denominator is the period from the date the option or stock was granted until the date the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed; and

(2) if the option or stock was granted to the spouse during the marriage but required continued employment following the date of dissolution of the marriage before the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed, the spouse's separate property interest is equal to the fraction of the option or restricted stock in which:

(A) the numerator is the period from the date of dissolution of the marriage until the date the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed; and

(B) the denominator is the period from the date the option or stock was granted until the date the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed.

(e) The computation described by Subsection (d) applies to each component of the benefit requiring varying periods of employment before the grant could be exercised or the restriction removed.

(f) Repealed by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768, Sec. 11(1), eff. September 1, 2009.

Added by Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 490 (H.B. 410), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768 (S.B. 866), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2009.

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768 (S.B. 866), Sec. 11(1), eff. September 1, 2009.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2007–2024 · leading case: Sprague v. Sprague, 363 S.W.3d 788 (Tex. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sprague v. Sprague, 363 S.W.3d 788 (Tex. App. 2012). · cites it 7× “Taggart, 552 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. 1977). Second, he contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury using language based on the language of former provisions of Texas Family Code section 3.”
Kacy DePriest v. Sidney Heath DePriest (Tex. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “Appellant argues that these types of benefits are considered community property under Texas case law and cites to many appellate cases.”
in the Matter of the Marriage of Rogelio Guerra & Susan Rabel Guerra (Tex. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 3.007(a). Susan was awarded less than a third of this amount.”
R.M. Sprague v. D.L. Sprague (Tex. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Second, he contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury using language based on the language of former provisions of Texas Family Code section 3.007 rather than language drawn from Taggart.”
in Re George Green & Garlan Green (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Texas Family Code Section 3.007 trial court erred in instructing the jury using language based on the language of former provisions of Texas In 2005, the Texas legislature passed House Bill Family Code section 3.”
Babatunde Aogo v. Nihinlola Olanrewaju (Tex. App. 2021). “” Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 3.007 (c). First, the use of “may” indicates that this is not the exclusive means of apportioning separate and community interests in a defined contribution account.”
in the Matter of the Marriage of Rogelio Guerra & Susan Rabel Guerra (Tex. App. 2022). “LAWS 1353–54 (amended 2009) (current version at TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 3.007(c)); see also Goyal v.”
In Re J.Y.O., a Child (Tex. 2024). “106 TEX. FAM. CODE § 3.007(c). This treatment is in keeping with the distribution of defined-contribution plans in other community-property states.”
Ronald J. Hewelt v. Virgina M. Hewelt (Tex. App. 2007). “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 3.007 (d)-(f) (West 2006).”
Ronald J. Hewelt v. Virgina M. Hewelt (Tex. App. 2007). “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 3.007 (d)-(f) (West 2006).”
Wesley Ward Warren v. Dianne L. Warren (Tex. App. 2008). “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 3.007 (d)-(f) (Vernon 2006).”
Michael Scott Giesler v. Kelly Ann Giesler (Tex. App. 2010). “Laws 1353 (amended 2009) (current version at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 3.007 (d)(2) (West 2009)) (hereinafter "former section 3.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.007(a): 2 cases
Sprague v. Sprague, 363 S.W.3d 788 (Tex. App. 2012). “Taggart, 552 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. 1977). Second, he contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury using language based on the language of former provisions of Texas Family Code section 3.”
in the Matter of the Marriage of Rogelio Guerra & Susan Rabel Guerra (Tex. App. 2022). “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 3.007(a). Susan was awarded less than a third of this amount.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.007(c): 3 cases
in the Matter of the Marriage of Rogelio Guerra & Susan Rabel Guerra (Tex. App. 2022). “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 3.007(a). Susan was awarded less than a third of this amount.”
in the Matter of the Marriage of Rogelio Guerra & Susan Rabel Guerra (Tex. App. 2022). “LAWS 1353–54 (amended 2009) (current version at TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 3.007(c)); see also Goyal v.”
In Re J.Y.O., a Child (Tex. 2024). “106 TEX. FAM. CODE § 3.007(c). This treatment is in keeping with the distribution of defined-contribution plans in other community-property states.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.007(d): 1 case
Kacy DePriest v. Sidney Heath DePriest (Tex. App. 2022). “Appellant argues that these types of benefits are considered community property under Texas case law and cites to many appellate cases.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.007(d)(2): 1 case
Kacy DePriest v. Sidney Heath DePriest (Tex. App. 2022). “Appellant argues that these types of benefits are considered community property under Texas case law and cites to many appellate cases.”
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.