In a decision handed down on July 2, 2024, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in Houston upheld a final divorce decree issued by the 247th District Court of Harris County in the case Angela Ross v. William Ross. The ruling serves as a strong reminder of the importance of legal preparation, evidence preservation, and procedural compliance—especially for self-represented litigants.
At Griffin, Cain & Herbig, Attorneys at Law, PLLC, we frequently advise clients across Conroe and The Woodlands, Texas, on the risks of navigating divorce without experienced legal counsel. The Ross case demonstrates how those risks can shape the outcome of a divorce involving complex property division, expert testimony, and procedural disputes.
Background of the Case
Angela and William Ross were married for nearly two decades before initiating divorce proceedings in 2021. After several delays, the case proceeded to a bench trial via Zoom in October 2022. The trial court granted the divorce and divided the couple’s community estate, which included William’s counseling business, Ross Counseling Service, various retirement accounts, real property, and other financial assets.
Complicating matters, Angela accused her own attorney of representing William’s interests and requested the attorney be removed. The court allowed the attorney to withdraw, and Angela represented herself pro se for the remainder of the trial and on appeal.
Angela raised five primary issues on appeal, challenging the court’s property division, expert witness testimony, denial of a continuance, and other procedural rulings. The appellate court rejected each of her claims, affirming the trial court’s judgment in full.
Oral vs. Written Rulings: Preservation Matters
Angela first claimed that the trial court’s written divorce decree did not reflect its oral pronouncements after the bench trial, particularly regarding the award of William’s retirement accounts. However, she failed to raise this discrepancy with the trial court or file a motion to correct the judgment, as required by Texas procedural rules.
The appellate court ruled that Angela waived her right to appeal this issue by not preserving it in the trial court. This underscores a critical principle in Texas appellate practice: if you don’t object at the trial level, you generally lose the right to complain later.
Expert Testimony: Qualifications and Conflicts
A major point of contention was the expert valuation of William’s business by CPA Elicia Rideau, who had previously prepared joint tax returns for the couple. Angela alleged a conflict of interest and challenged Rideau’s qualifications and methodology.
The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision to allow Rideau’s testimony. Rideau, a licensed CPA with years of experience in William’s bookkeeping and tax filings, used the excess earnings method to value the business. The court found no abuse of discretion in her selection of valuation methods or in her professional qualifications.
Importantly, the court also found no evidence that Rideau’s prior preparation of the couple’s joint tax return created a conflict of interest significant enough to disqualify her as an expert witness.
Denial of Expert Designation and Continuance
Angela also appealed the court’s denial of her request to designate her own expert. However, she never obtained a ruling on that request nor objected to the court’s failure to rule. As a result, the appellate court ruled that this issue, too, had not been preserved for appeal.
Similarly, her request for a continuance after firing her attorney during trial was denied. The appellate court noted that Angela had already been granted prior continuances and that her own absence from the virtual courtroom limited the court’s ability to address her request further. The court held that the trial court acted within its discretion in proceeding without further delay.
Property Division: No Abuse of Discretion
Angela also challenged the fairness of the property division, particularly the allocation of $280,000 from a joint account and a $21,000 plumbing debt. However, the court emphasized that trial courts have wide latitude under Texas Family Code § 7.001 to divide marital property in a manner they deem “just and right.”
Angela’s complaints lacked legal support and context, and she failed to show that the trial court’s overall division—covering multiple homes, vehicles, accounts, and a business—was so one-sided as to be manifestly unjust. Without a strong evidentiary showing or legal argument, her claims fell short.
Lessons from the Ross Case
For anyone going through a divorce—especially one involving business interests, retirement assets, or complex financial questions—Ross v. Ross illustrates the real-world consequences of procedural missteps and inadequate preparation. Here are key takeaways:
-
Self-representation carries risk: Representing yourself, especially in emotionally charged and financially complex cases, can lead to avoidable errors and lost claims.
-
Procedural rules are not optional: Failing to object, request rulings, or raise issues properly can permanently waive your rights to appeal.
-
Expert witnesses matter: Challenging an expert’s credibility or methodology requires more than speculation—it demands legal and factual support.
-
Property divisions are hard to overturn: Unless an appellant can show a division was clearly unjust, appellate courts are unlikely to reverse it.
Strategic Divorce Counsel in Conroe and The Woodlands, Texas
At Griffin, Cain & Herbig, Attorneys at Law, PLLC, we understand what’s at stake in divorce cases. Whether you’re dividing real estate, dealing with business valuations, or facing litigation over retirement accounts, our firm offers experienced, assertive representation designed to protect your financial future.
If you’re considering divorce in Conroe or The Woodlands, Texas, contact us today at )936) 539-1011 to schedule a confidential consultation. Let us help you avoid costly errors and secure the outcome you deserve.
