Rather, it declined to change those orders made by the previous court in the 2017 modification case because it found that Mustafa did not meet his burden to show changed circumstances to warrant modification. See Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *4 (Tex. App.-Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.)
(instructing courts to consider "the arguments, evidence, and citations relied on by those parties to determine which issues the parties intended to and actually briefed" when considering waiver (citations omitted)). Construing Christopher's briefing under this standard, we address his issues as best as we can. See id.; Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 Tex.App. LEXIS 5514, at *4 (Tex. App.-Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.) (liberally construing brief and addressing issues raised by appellant "to the extent that we are able to divine his arguments"); see also Housing Auth. of City of Austin v. Elbendary, 581 S.W.3d 488, 491 n.1 (Tex. App.-Austin 2019, no pet.)
In the interest of justice, we will address Norton's issues, as best we can, based on his arguments. See Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *2 (Tex. App.- Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.)
In the interest of justice, we will address Goss's issues to the extent we are able to ascertain his arguments. See Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *2 (Tex. App.-Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.)
We thus have no choice but to hold that Handy has waived any argument that the ALJ's findings were erroneous or that the trial court erred in excluding his untimely filed exhibits (indeed, Handy does not attempt to explain why it would have been erroneous to exclude his exhibits). See Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *4 (Tex. App.-Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.);
Furthermore, when no reporter's record is filed on appeal, we must presume that the omitted record supports the trial court's implied findings and judgment. Singh v. Federal Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n, No. 03-14-00354-CV, 2014 WL 6893696, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 5, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) ("[B]ecause no reporter's record has been brought forward on appeal, we must presume that the[] implied findings by the trial court were indeed supported by sufficient evidence."); Hebisen v. Clear Creek Indep. Sch. Dist., 217 S.W.3d 527, 536 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.) ("Where there is neither reporter's record nor findings of fact, we assume the trial court heard sufficient evidence to make all necessary findings in support of its judgment."); see also Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.) ("[W]ithout a complete reporter's record on appeal, we are unable to determine whether the trial court erred. Accordingly, we must assume that the omitted parts of the record support the trial court's judgment.
Where there is no reporter's record, we assume the trial court heard sufficient evidence to make all necessary findings in support of the order. Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing Hebisen v. Clear Creek Indep. Sch. Dist., 217 S.W.3d 527, 536 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.)). Thus, we must assume the trial court heard sufficient evidence to support a finding that Mother has a history or pattern of child neglect thereby rebutting the presumption that appointing the parents as joint managing conservators was in the children's best interest.
And even if the findings in that section would have been required had the trial court modified the support obligation, they were not required here because the trial court left the existing support obligation in place. See Onkst v. Onkst, No. 03-15-00636-CV, 2017 WL 2628245, at *4 (Tex. App.—Austin June 16, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.); Hardin v. Hardin, 161 S.W.3d 14, 19 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004), judgm't vacated op. not withdrawn, No. 14-03-00342-CV, 2005 WL 310076 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 10, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op.). Father acknowledges as much in his reply brief.