Divorce Lawyer > File Divorce > JURISDICTION VENUE

Sec. 6.301.  GENERAL RULE FOR FILING DIVORCE.  A suit may not be maintained in this state unless at the time the suit is filed either the petitioner or the respondent has been:

Remember you can always file yourself but an experienced San Antonio Divorce Lawyer can help you through the process while avoiding the pitfalls others get trapped in.

(1)  a domiciliary of this state for the preceding six-month period;  and (2)  a resident of the county in which the suit is filed for the preceding 90-day period. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997 Sec. 6.302.

Suit BY NONRESIDENT SPOUSE.  If one spouse has been a domiciliary of this state for at least the last six months, a spouse domiciled in another state or nation may file a suit in the county in which the domiciliary spouse resides at the time the petition is filed. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.303.

ABSENCE ON PUBLIC SERVICE.  Time spent by a Texas domiciliary outside this state or outside the county of residence of the domiciliary while in the service of the armed forces or other service of the United States or of this state is considered residence in this state and in that county. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.304.

ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL NOT PREVIOUSLY RESIDENTS.  A person not previously a resident of this state who is serving in the armed forces of the United States and has been stationed at one or more military installations in this state for at least the last six months and at a military installation in a county of this state for at least the last 90 days is considered to be a Texas domiciliary and a resident of that county for those periods for the purpose of filing suit for dissolution of a marriage. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.305.

ACQUIRING JURISDICTION OVER NONRESIDENT RESPONDENT.  (a)  If the petitioner in a suit for dissolution of a marriage is a resident or a domiciliary of this state at the time the suit for dissolution is filed, the court may exercise personal jurisdiction over the respondent or over the respondent’s personal representative although the respondent is not a resident of this state if: (1)  this state is the last marital residence of the petitioner and the respondent and the suit is filed before the second anniversary of the date on which marital residence ended;  or (2)  there is any basis consistent with the constitutions of this state and the United States for the exercise of the personal jurisdiction. (b)  A court acquiring jurisdiction under this section also acquires jurisdiction over the respondent in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.306.

JURISDICTION TO ANNUL MARRIAGE.  (a)  A suit for annulment of a marriage may be maintained in this state only if the parties were married in this state or if either party is domiciled in this state. (b)  A suit for annulment is a suit in rem, affecting the status of the parties to the marriage. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.307.

JURISDICTION TO DECLARE MARRIAGE VOID.  (a)  Either party to a marriage made void by this chapter may sue to have the marriage declared void, or the court may declare the marriage void in a collateral proceeding. (b)  The court may declare a marriage void only if: (1)  the purported marriage was contracted in this state;  or (2)  either party is domiciled in this state. (c)  A suit to have a marriage declared void is a suit in rem, affecting the status of the parties to the purported marriage. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 6.308.

EXERCISING PARTIAL JURISDICTION.  (a)  A court in which a suit for dissolution of a marriage is filed may exercise its jurisdiction over those portions of the suit for which it has authority. (b)  The court’s authority to resolve the issues in controversy between the parties may be restricted because the court lacks: (1)  the required personal jurisdiction over a nonresident party in a suit for dissolution of the marriage; (2)  the required jurisdiction under Chapter 152;  or (3)  the required jurisdiction under Chapter 159.