in the Matter of the Marriage of Rasha Al Hashimi and Haider Alwash


Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 30, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00488-CV IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF RASHA AL HASHIMI AND HAIDER ALWASH On Appeal from the 306th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 15-FD-2744 MEMORANDUM OPINION Rasha Al Hashimi (“Rasha”) appeals from a final divorce decree. In her first issue, Rasha contends the trial court erred by awarding her former father-in-law, intervenor Salam Alwash (“Salam”), certain property she contends belongs to the community estate. In her second issue, Rasha asserts that she proved by clear and convincing evidence that her husband, Haider Alwash (“Haider”), committed adultery, and the trial court erred by failing to grant the divorce on adultery grounds. The trial court granted the divorce on insupportability grounds, and Rasha does not challenge that finding. After review of the record, we conclude that Rasha failed to challenge all independent grounds supporting the trial court’s judgment awarding the disputed property to Salam. Thus, we overrule her first issue. Further, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the divorce on insupportability grounds, rather than adultery, under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. Background Haider and Rasha married legally in October 2011 and through a religious ceremony in August 2013. They separated in late September 2015, and Rasha filed for divorce on insupportability and adultery grounds in October 2015. Rasha also alleged that Haider fraudulently transferred community assets ($603,000 cash) to Haider’s brother and sister-in-law, Hashim Salam Alwash (“Hashim”) and Israa Basil Ali (“Ali”). Rasha requested that the trial court restore this cash to the community estate. In September 2016, the trial court signed an agreed order requiring that (1) $595,000 from Hashim’s and Ali’s bank account be transferred to a separate, interest-bearing account (the “Transfer Account”) and (2) the “bank . . . only disburse any funds from the account pursuant to a court order.” Salam filed a petition in intervention in the divorce proceedings, claiming that two homes, the funds in the Transfer Account, and a vehicle (the “Honda CRV”)— all of which Rasha claimed as community assets—belonged to him.1 Salam sought a declaration that he owned these assets, and he requested the court to impose a constructive trust and award the contested assets to him. 1 Haider also claimed that these assets were Salam’s property that Haider held in trust for Salam. 2 The trial court conducted a two-day bench trial. Rasha testified that Haider sent love notes and text messages, and placed phone calls, to another woman with whom Haider claimed to be in love. Rasha believed that Haider committed adultery because he said he loved the other woman and had kissed her. Rasha introduced photos of messages exchanged between Haider and the other woman, including messages in which the two declared their love for each other. Rasha presented no proof that Haider had extramarital sexual relations with the other woman. Rasha testified that Haider refused ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals