Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Sherry Ann Kreiling and Derrie James Kreiling married in 2001 and had two children. At their June 2025 divorce trial, both parties were represented by counsel and announced that they had settled most issues, including conservatorship, possession, child support, and property division. Each confirmed the agreement on the record. Geographic restrictions, attorney’s fees, and spousal maintenance remained contested.
After hearing evidence, the trial court approved the parties’ agreements, imposed a geographic restriction covering Clay County and contiguous counties, awarded Sherry’s attorney $3,500 in fees, denied spousal maintenance, and directed counsel to prepare the decree. Before the written decree was signed, Sherry objected and sought to raise later developments, including Derrie’s post-trial indictment. The court signed the decree on November 12, 2025, and Sherry appealed pro se after her new-trial motion was overruled by operation of law.
The Court’s Holding
The Seventh Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the trial court orally rendered a full and final judgment on June 3, when it approved the parties’ agreements and announced its rulings on the disputed issues. Because judgment had already been rendered, Sherry’s later attempt to withdraw consent was untimely. Her challenges to provisions she had approved were also barred by the invited-error doctrine because she alleged no fraud, collusion, or misrepresentation.
The court likewise rejected Sherry’s conservatorship challenge. She had agreed to joint managing conservatorship and standard possession, and the limited trial evidence did not require a finding of a history or pattern of abuse under Texas Family Code section 153.004. Finally, she failed to preserve her complaint about incomplete financial discovery because she announced ready for trial, did not alert the trial court that discovery remained outstanding, and did not request a continuance.
Key Takeaways
- An oral pronouncement can render a final judgment when the trial court’s words and context demonstrate a present intent to dispose of the entire case.
- A party generally cannot challenge agreed provisions that the party approved or induced absent fraud, collusion, or misrepresentation.
- A claim of incomplete discovery must be raised before trial and supported by an appropriate request for relief, such as a continuance, to preserve appellate review.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that consent to a divorce settlement must be withdrawn before judgment is rendered, which may occur through an oral ruling rather than the later signing of a written decree. It also illustrates the difficulty of overturning agreed conservatorship and property provisions on appeal.
For family-law practitioners, the opinion highlights the importance of placing any objections to settlement terms, family-violence evidence, and unresolved discovery squarely before the trial court while it can still act on them.