In re V.I.P.M., No. 05-19-00197-CV, 2020 WL 1472210, at *1 (Tex. App.- Dallas Mar. 26, 2020, pet. denied) (mem. op.); In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 767 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, no pet.). Taken together, Cline, In re V.I.P.M., and In re C.F. stand for the proposition that a single filing in the appellate court cannot be treated as both an original proceeding and a direct appeal.
"When reviewing a trial court's family law decision for an abuse of discretion, legal and factual insufficiency are not independent reversible grounds of error but are relevant factors." In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 773 (Tex. App.- Fort Worth 2019, no pet.).
As the factfinder, the trial court could choose to believe all, some, or none of the evidence. In re C.F. , 576 S.W.3d 761, 774 (Tex. App.โFort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding). The factfinder may believe one witness and disbelieve others.
Because the obligation to pay child support is a duty, not a debt, a person may be held in contempt and imprisoned for failing to pay child support. In re C.F. , 576 S.W.3d 761, 770 (Tex. App.โFort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding) ; see TEX. FAM. CODE ยงยง 157.001, 157.166 โ.167. Medical support is a child-support obligation, TEX. FAM. CODE ยง 154.183, and it is also enforceable by contempt, C.F. , 576 S.W.3d. at 770.
Because the obligation to pay child support is a duty, not a debt, a person may be held in contempt and imprisoned for failing to pay child support. In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 770 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding); see Tex. Fam. Code ยงยง 157.001, 157.166-.167. Medical support is a child-support obligation, Tex. Fam. Code ยง 154.183, and it is also enforceable by contempt, C.F., 576 S.W.3d. at 770.
Until he did so, the burden rested squarely on Father's shoulders. In re C.F. , 576 S.W.3d 761, 773 (Tex. App. 2019) ("The movant on a motion to enforce a child-support order, including an order to provide medical support, has the burden of establishing the amount of support owed." (citation omitted)).
A person may be held in contempt and imprisoned for failing to pay child support because the obligation to pay child support is a duty, not a debt. In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 770 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding); see Tex. Fam. Code Ann. ยง 157.001(b) ("The court may enforce by contempt any provision of a temporary or final order.").
R.R.K., 2022 WL 1257136, at *4. In determining whether an abuse of discretion has occurred because the evidence is legally or factually insufficient to support the trial court's decision, we engage in a two-pronged inquiry: (1) did the trial court have enough information upon which to exercise its discretion; and (2) did the trial court err in applying its discretion? In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 773 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding &no pet.). The applicable sufficiency review comes into play in answering the first prong.
However, the CASA did not testify. See In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 774 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, no pet.) (noting that a trial court may take judicial notice of the contents of its file, but it may not take judicial notice of the truth of any factual allegations contained in its file). Parents, on the other hand, testified that Diego was the aggressor who had attacked D.T. and B.R. at different times.
In determining whether an abuse of discretion has occurred because the evidence is legally or factually insufficient to support the trial court's decision, we engage in a two-pronged inquiry: (1) did the trial court have enough information upon which to exercise its discretion; and (2) did the trial court err in applying its discretion? In re C.F., 576 S.W.3d 761, 773 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2019, no pet.). The applicable sufficiency review comes into play in answering the first prong.