Opinion
No. 05-02-00322-CV
Opinion Filed December 1, 2003.
On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 91-13862-Y.
Affirmed.Before Justices MOSELEY, RICHTER, and FRANCIS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Todd Matthews complains about the trial court's order confirming child support arrearage and granting Dawn Harris a cumulative judgment against him in the amount of $46,203.55. In three issues, Matthews asserts the trial court abused its discretion in rendering the judgment because no motion for enforcement was before the court, and the evidence is insufficient to support the amount of the judgment. We conclude appellant's issues are without merit and affirm the trial court's judgment.
Appellant moved to reduce his child support payments. At the hearing on his motion, appellant was cross-examined on the existing child support order and arrearages. Appellant's attorney objected to the testimony as irrelevant because the proceeding was not an enforcement action. Opposing counsel explained the relevance and the court overruled the objection. Appellant's attorney then instructed appellant not to answer further questions about the amount of the current arrearage "because we don't know if that is a factual bases [sic] that that is true or not." Later in the proceedings, appellee was questioned about the amount of appellant's arrearage. Again, appellant's attorney objected to relevance stating the matter was not a contempt proceeding. This exchange between the trial court and appellant's attorney followed:
The Court: Well, we need to have an — it's not going to be contempt but we need to have an order that has a finding in there as to what the current arrearage is.
Ms. Allen: How do we determine if we don't have the child support records and I had not had a chance to do it?
The Court: I guess y'all are going to provided [sic] them for me and I will have to go through them I assume.
Ms. Allen: Okay. That would be a fair way to do it Judge, let her testify as to what.
The Court: We will take a look.
Ms. Allen: Absolutely.
The trial court ultimately signed an order granting appellant's motion to modify. The order reduced appellant's child support payment to $375 per month, reduced his medical support payment to $100 per month, and continued his child-support arrearage payment at $200 per month. The order also confirmed the amount of arrearage and granted appellee a cumulative judgment including accrued interest in the amount of $46,203.55 as of November 1, 2001.
In his first and second issues, appellant complains about appellee's failure to file a motion to enforce or other pleading requesting confirmation of child support arrearage and a cumulative judgment. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the absence of such a pleading is not dispositive because the matter was tried by consent. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 67. As noted above, appellant agreed with the trial court that the arrearage issue would be addressed when he agreed to let the trial court review the child support records for determination of the arrearage. We resolve appellant's first and second issues against him.
In his third issue, appellant asserts the evidence is insufficient to support the amount of the judgment. Appellant does not cite law or provide substantive argument or evidence to support his position under this issue. Absent cites to the record, legal authorities, or analysis, appellant has failed to preserve this issue for review. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.1(h). We affirm the trial court's judgment.