Alejandro disputed Elizabeth's testimony about his physical abuse and denied Elizabeth's allegations against him. He also testified that he had never hit her. Cf. In re Marriage of Harrison, 557 S.W.3d at 128-30 (parent disputed and denied other parent's testimony about history of domestic violence); see also Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.) (trial court did not err in appointing father joint managing conservator where nothing in record undisputedly showed history or pattern of violence). Some of Elizabeth's family members also testified about Alejandro's purported physical abuse of Elizabeth.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion when it makes a decision on conflicting evidence. Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.). If some evidence of a substantive and probative character exists to support the trial court's decision, there is no abuse of discretion.
In conducting our review of both the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence, we are mindful that the jury, as fact-finder, was the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony. Keller, 168 S.W.3d at 819; see also Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 920 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). We may not substitute our judgment for the fact-finder's, even if we would reach a different answer on the evidence.
In a bench trial where the record contains no findings of fact and conclusions of law, all necessary findings of fact to support the trial court's judgment are implied. Worford, 801 S.W.2d at 109; Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 920 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.). "[E]very reasonable inference and intendment supported by the record will be drawn in favor of the trial court's judgment."
The trial court is given wide latitude in determining custody issues. Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 920 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2003, no pet). Where, as here, the record contains no findings of fact and conclusions of law
When parties present different versions of an encounter, the trial court is the sole judge of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 920 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.). Additionally, although a single incident of physical violence may constitute a history of physical abuse, a trial court is not required to find that a single incident constitutes a history of physical abuse.
Failure to file that notice waives a party's ability to complain on appeal about the trial court's failure to file findings of fact and conclusions of law. In re W.C.B., 337 S.W.3d at 513 n.2 (citing Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921-22 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.)). C. Application of Law to Facts
A trial court does not abuse its discretion when it makes a decision on conflicting evidence. Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.). An abuse of discretion does not occur as long as some evidence of a substantive and probative character exists to support the trial court's decision.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion when it makes a decision on conflicting evidence. Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.). If some evidence of a substantive and probative character exists to support the trial court's decision, there is no abuse of discretion.
Civil procedure rule 297 requires a party to file a notice of past due findings and conclusions if the trial court does not make findings and conclusions within a specified period of time. See TEXR. CIV. P. 297; Burns v. Burns, 116 S.W.3d 916, 921-22 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). Failure to file the notice waives a party's ability to complain on appeal about the trial court's failure to file findings and conclusions.