Sec. 3.402. CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT; OFFSETS. (a) A claim for reimbursement exists when one or both spouses use property of one marital estate to confer on the property of another marital estate a benefit which, if not repaid, would result in unjust enrichment to the benefited estate.
(b) A spouse seeking reimbursement to a marital estate must prove:
(1) that the spouse or both spouses used property of the marital estate to confer a benefit on the property of another marital estate;
(2) the value of the benefit described by Subdivision (1); and
(3) that unjust enrichment of the benefited estate will occur if the benefited estate is not required to reimburse the conferring estate.
(c) For purposes of this subchapter, the property of a marital estate confers a benefit on another marital estate's property if:
(1) one or both spouses used property of the conferring estate to pay a debt, liability, or expense that in equity and good conscience should have been paid from the benefited estate's property;
(2) one or both spouses used property of the conferring estate to make improvements on the benefited estate's real property, and the improvements resulted in an enhancement in the value of the benefited estate's real property; or
(3) one or both spouses used time, toil, talent, or effort to enhance the value of property of a spouse's separate estate beyond that which was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the spouse's separate property, and for which the community marital estate did not receive adequate compensation.
(d) For purposes of this subchapter, the value of the benefit conferred by the property of one marital estate on the property of another marital estate is determined as of the date of the trial's commencement and:
(1) if the benefit resulted from the use of the conferring estate's property to pay a debt, liability, or expense that in equity and good conscience should have been paid from the benefited estate's property, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the amount of the debt, liability, or expense paid by the conferring estate;
(2) if the benefit resulted from the use of the conferring estate's property to make improvements on the benefited estate's real property, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the enhancement in the value of the benefited estate's real property that resulted from the improvements; or
(3) if the benefit resulted from the use of time, toil, talent, or effort to enhance the value of property of a spouse's separate estate, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the value of the time, toil, talent, or effort beyond that which was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the spouse's separate property.
(e) The determination of whether unjust enrichment will occur if one marital estate is not required to reimburse another marital estate is a question for the court to decide.
(f) The court shall resolve a claim for reimbursement by using equitable principles, including the principle that claims for reimbursement may be offset against each other if the court determines it to be appropriate.
(g) A claim for reimbursement of a marital estate by one spouse may be offset by the value of any related benefit that the other spouse proves that the conferring estate received from the benefited estate, including:
(1) the value of the use and enjoyment of the property by the conferring estate, except that the separate marital estate of a spouse may not claim an offset for use and enjoyment of a primary or secondary residence owned wholly or partly by the separate marital estate against contributions made by the community marital estate to the separate marital estate;
(2) income received by the conferring estate from the property of the benefited estate; or
(3) any reduction in the amount of any income tax obligation of the conferring estate by virtue of the conferring estate claiming tax-deductible items relating to the property of the benefited estate, such as depreciation, interest, taxes, maintenance, or other deductible payments.
(h) The party seeking an offset to a claim for reimbursement has the burden of proof with respect to the offset.
Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 692, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 838, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 768 (S.B. 866), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2009.
Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 411 (H.B. 1547), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2023.
Notes of Decisions
Sonnier v. Sonnier, 331 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2011).
· cites it 8× “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 3.402 (West Supp.2010); Vallone v.”
Moroch v. Collins, 174 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005).
· cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 3.402(a)(6), (b) ("economic contribution" is the dollar amount of "capital improvements to property other than by incurring debt" and does not include expenditures for ordinary maintenance and repair or for taxes, interest, or insurance or the…”
Virginia Roe Burns v. Denis Lyons Burns, 433 S.W.3d 189 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014).
· cites it 4× “She also argues that Burns failed to trace his separate property funds to community assets and failed to prove that the expenditures were reimbursable.”
Amanda Bradshaw v. Barney Samuel Bradshaw, 555 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. 2018).
“The concurrence also rejects Barney's testimony regarding "the substantial work he put into repairing and improving both houses," concluding that his argument "is in the nature of a reimbursement claim but the record contains no evidence of the values involved.”
Garcia v. Garcia, 170 S.W.3d 644 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005).
“Tex.Fam. Code Ann. § 3.402(a)(6). The amount of a claim for economic contribution is determined by multiplying the equity 2 in the benefitted property on the date of divorce by a fraction.”
Nelson v. Nelson, 193 S.W.3d 624 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2006).
“Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 3.402 (Vernon Supp.2005) provides six instances in which an economic contribution claim may be created.”
Chavez v. Chavez, 269 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008).
“” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 3.402(b)(2) (Vernon 2006).”
Guillermo Rivera v. Maria E. Hernandez, 441 S.W.3d 413 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2014).
“TexFam.Code Ann. § 3.402. But a claim for reimbursement does not affect the rule of inception of title under which the character of property is determined at the time the right to own or claim the property rises, nor does it create an owner *424 ship interest in the properly.”
In re the Marriage of William, 264 S.W.3d 850 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008).
“See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 3.402(a)(1), (b)(1) (the term “economic contribution” includes “the dollar amount of the reduction of the principal amount of [the] debt” but does not include interest payments).”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(3): 2 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(8): 2 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a): 12 cases
Amanda Bradshaw v. Barney Samuel Bradshaw, 555 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. 2018).
“The concurrence also rejects Barney's testimony regarding "the substantial work he put into repairing and improving both houses," concluding that his argument "is in the nature of a reimbursement claim but the record contains no evidence of the values involved.”
Virginia Roe Burns v. Denis Lyons Burns, 433 S.W.3d 189 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014).
“She also argues that Burns failed to trace his separate property funds to community assets and failed to prove that the expenditures were reimbursable.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(1): 7 cases
In re the Marriage of William, 264 S.W.3d 850 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008).
“See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 3.402(a)(1), (b)(1) (the term “economic contribution” includes “the dollar amount of the reduction of the principal amount of [the] debt” but does not include interest payments).”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(2): 3 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(3): 4 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(5): 2 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(6): 3 cases
Moroch v. Collins, 174 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005).
“See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 3.402(a)(6), (b) ("economic contribution" is the dollar amount of "capital improvements to property other than by incurring debt" and does not include expenditures for ordinary maintenance and repair or for taxes, interest, or insurance or the…”
Garcia v. Garcia, 170 S.W.3d 644 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005).
“Tex.Fam. Code Ann. § 3.402(a)(6). The amount of a claim for economic contribution is determined by multiplying the equity 2 in the benefitted property on the date of divorce by a fraction.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(7): 1 case
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a)(8): 5 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b): 15 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b)(1): 1 case
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b)(2): 1 case
Chavez v. Chavez, 269 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008).
“” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 3.402(b)(2) (Vernon 2006).”
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(c): 3 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(d): 6 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(d)(2): 2 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(d)(3): 3 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(e): 4 cases
Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(f): 2 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.