(a) The issue of the existence of an affirmative defense to a motion for enforcement does not arise unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense.
(b) The respondent must prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT
Applied in 6 court decisions — leading case in the Interest of D.S.P. and H.R.P., Children (2006)
Most recently applied in in the Interest of A.S.G., J.N.G., and J.D.G., Minor Children (January 2011)
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
(a) The issue of the existence of an affirmative defense to a motion for enforcement does not arise unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense.
(b) The respondent must prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
Official source: Texas Constitution and Statutes. Reproduced from public-domain Texas statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.