New Texas Law Clarifies Jurisdiction in Post-Divorce Property Division Cases

A. Introduction
In family law, few issues cause more confusion than what happens to marital assets overlooked in a divorce decree. When community property is accidentally omitted, parties often wonder: Which court has the authority to resolve it? The Texas Legislature addressed this very problem in House Bill 1916 (2025), which amends Section 9.201 of the Texas Family Code to make jurisdictional authority unmistakably clear .

B. Changes in Family Law in Context
Under prior law, jurisdictional questions over omitted community property sometimes triggered disputes between courts of different counties—or even different districts within the same county. The absence of explicit statutory guidance left open the risk of conflicting rulings or strategic forum shopping.

HB 1916 closes this gap. The new statute specifies that the court which rendered the divorce decree, annulment, or prior property division order retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate division of any undivided community property . By codifying this rule, the Legislature has reinforced judicial efficiency and consistency in post-divorce property cases.

C. Practical Implications for Family Lawyers
For practitioners, this amendment eliminates uncertainty. Attorneys now know that any dispute about omitted property must return to the original court of record. This reduces:

• Jurisdictional challenges: No more jockeying between counties or courts.
• Inconsistent outcomes: The same judge who issued the decree has the authority to finish dividing the estate.
• Litigation costs: Clients avoid unnecessary procedural fights before substantive issues are ever reached.

D. Hypothetical Use Scenarios
Consider two common examples:

• Forgotten Retirement Account: A 401(k) was inadvertently left out of the divorce decree. Rather than filing a new action in another county, the parties must go back to the original divorce court for adjudication.
• Unaddressed Real Estate: A jointly owned parcel of land was omitted from the decree. Under HB 1916, the same court that finalized the divorce retains jurisdiction to divide that property, regardless of where the land is located.

E. Guidance for Practitioners
Attorneys should take the following steps in light of HB 1916:

1. File in the Correct Court: Always return to the original divorce court when seeking division of omitted assets.
2. Advise Clients Early: Explain to clients that jurisdictional disputes are no longer a viable tactic—reducing both cost and delay.
3. Draft Decrees Carefully: While HB 1916 provides clarity after the fact, the best practice remains to ensure that all community property is identified and divided at the time of divorce.

F. Looking Ahead
Because HB 1916 applies to cases filed on or after its effective date as well as those already pending, its impact is immediate . Judges and practitioners alike can rely on a statutory rule that enhances predictability in post-divorce litigation. This reform also reflects a broader legislative trend in Texas: streamlining family law procedures to reduce gamesmanship and emphasize fairness.

G. Conclusion: Why This Change Matters
HB 1916 may appear procedural, but its implications are significant. By ensuring that unresolved property issues return to the original court, the Legislature has strengthened judicial economy, protected litigants from conflicting rulings, and reinforced the integrity of divorce decrees. For lawyers—whether family law specialists or those in adjacent practice areas—the statute provides clarity that is both immediate and enduring.
​
For non-family lawyers who encounter clients with unresolved divorce property issues, knowing about HB 1916 is invaluable. And for those clients, having a trusted family law practitioner who understands these nuances can make all the difference.