Cheaters Pay The Toll

Here is a new way to catch a cheating spouse: toll booth records.

According to the Associated Press, electronic toll collection systems are emerging as a powerful means of proving infidelity. Agencies in seven of the twelve states surveyed indicated that they would provide electronic toll information in response to court orders in criminal and civil cases, including divorces. Even if the state agency refuses to provide the information, it can frequently be obtained from the other spouse through the normal discovery process.

Texas is not among the states that use “EZ Pass” system, but attorneys can try to subpoena the records of the Texas Department of Transportation to the Electronic toll collection records (Texas E-Pass) kept by the department.

Source: “Toll Records Trip Up Philanderers” by Chris Newmarker, published at Yahoo! News.

Important Texas Custody Cases- Long v. Long

Long v. Long, 144 SW 3d 64 (Tex. App- El Paso, 2004, no pet.)

Holding: Standards of review, best interest factors in conservatorship proceedings

Issue: Whether court abused its discretion by modifying the divorce decree and awarding father the exclusive right to determine the primary residence of the children.

Facts: Mother and Father were appointed joint managing conservators (JMC) of their two daughters in a divorce decree that was signed on June 2, 2000, with mother having the right to determine domicile. One August 31, 2001, father filed a petition seeking modification, asking that he be awarded the exlusive right to establish the primary residence of the children, or in the alternative, sole managing conservatorship (SMC).

The trial court found that modification was in the best interest of the girls and continued the parties' JMC. However, father was awarded the exclusive right to establish the primary residence of the girls without regard to geographic locatin. Mother filed a motion for new trial which was denied by the trial court, and subsequently filed a notice of appeal.

Discussion: Once it has been determined that the abuse-of-discretion standard applies, an appellate court engages in a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether the trial court had suffricient information on which to exercise its discretion; and (2) whether the trial court erred in its application of discretion..the traditional sufficiency review comes into play with regard to the first question; however the inquiry does not end there. The appellate court then proceeds to determine whether, based on the elicited evidence, the trial court made a reasonable decision..stated inversely, the appellate court must conclude the trial court's decision was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.