Jonathan David Jarrett v. Tiffany Marie Jarrett

Tyler, Texas family law lawyers represented the parties in a divorce.<br>
<br>
Tiffany testified that she and Jonathan have two children, Ian and Luke, who were fifteen and thirteen at the time of trial. Tiffany testified that she and Jonathan separated in late November,[3] when she left as a result of Jonathan's abuse and went to a women's shelter. According to Tiffany, several incidents that November led up to her leaving, and Jonathan was guilty of cruel treatment towards her. She testified that at the beginning of that November, Jonathan assaulted their youngest son, Luke. That week Luke had been slow to get ready for school, and one day, Tiffany was waiting in the car for her boys to take them to school. When only Ian got in the car, Tiffany asked him where Luke was, and Ian stated that Jonathan "has [Luke] in his room and he's spanking him." Tiffany testified "my heart just went to my throat because through the whole marriage when Mr. Jarrett gets angry, he loses control. I've had to step in several times to stop him because he just - - he has no control over his anger." According to Tiffany, Luke came running to the car crying and panicking, and Jonathan had "beat [Luke] so bad that he had buckle marks imbedded into his leg and he was bleeding [and] [y]ou could see the belt marks across his stomach [and] [y]ou could see where [Jonathan] kicked [Luke] in the crotch and bruised his whole groin." Tiffany testified that Jonathan ran out screaming profanities and asked why she was not calling the police, which Tiffany explained was a reference to 2010 when she had called the police due to his abuse. After she saw Luke's injuries, she told Jonathan to leave, and he left. Photographs Tiffany took of Luke's injuries after the incident were admitted into evidence. <br>
<br>
* * *<br>
<br>
Legal issue Did the trial court abuse its discretion in appointing sole managing conservatorship to one parent and restricting the other parent's access based on findings of family violence?<br>
Headnote<br>
<br>
FAMILY LAW. CONSERVATORSHIP AND CHILD CUSTODY. The case addresses an appeal against a trial court's decision to name the mother as the sole managing conservator of the children after finding credible evidence of family violence committed by the father, which led to restricting his visitation rights to supervised and limited access, in consideration of the best interests of the children per Texas Family Code § 153.004 and § 153.131.<br>
<br>
FAMILY LAW. CHILD SUPPORT AND SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE. The appeal involves issues related to the trial court's orders on child support arrears, spousal maintenance, and the division of marital property, emphasizing the court's discretion in awarding these financial obligations and property divisions as just and right under Texas Family Code § 7.001.<br>
<br>
APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE AND APPELLATE BRIEFING. The judgment reaffirms the necessity for appellants to adequately brief appellate issues, citing legal authority and providing analysis for contentions to preserve issues for appeal, highlighting that pro se appellants are held to the same standards as represented parties.<br>
<br>
EVIDENCE. FAMILY VIOLENCE AND CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENT. The court's determination of family violence finds support in testimonial evidence and photographic documentation of injuries, underscoring the trial court's role as the sole arbiter of witness credibility, thereby upholding findings of fact when supported by more than a scintilla of evidence.<br>
<br>
CIVIL LAW. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN CIVIL CASES. The court confirms that the doctrine of ineffective assistance does not generally extend to civil cases, including divorce proceedings, emphasizing that appellants are responsible for securing competent legal representation and are bound by their chosen counsel's performance.<br>
<br>
Key Phrases Final Decree of Divorce. Family violence. Sole managing conservator. Child support arrearage. Psychological evaluation. <br>

Affirmed