A February 2025 opinion from the Corpus Christi-Edinburg Court of Appeals seems to say that a jury does not get to decide whether a reimbursement claim should be granted but may decide factual issues on which a reimbursement claim could be based upon. For example, a jury could decide the specific question of whether community funds were used to improve a separate property house and the amount of enhancement of value attributable to that expenditure, but only the trial judge can decide whether to award the reimbursement claim.
The opinion in Leeson v Lesson, No. 13-23-00158-CV (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2/20/2025)(mem. op.) stated:
We observe that “answers of the jury regarding disposition of property,” including reimbursement, are “advisory only,” and there is no right to a jury trial when the jury’s verdict is merely advisory. Cockerham v. Cockerham, 527 S.W.2d 162, 173 (Tex. 1975); Vallone v. Vallone, 644 S.W.2d 455, 459 (Tex. 1982); see Walter v. Walter, 127 S.W.3d 396, 398 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2004, no pet.). That said,
[t]hough the trial court has wide discretion in dividing the property of the spouses as it feels just and in disregarding advisory answers of the jury, it may not ignore the jury’s answers which extend to issues of fact from which the status of property is determined. This is particularly true when the disposition of the property to the husband or wife is based solely on its status.
Cockerham, 527 S.W.2d at 173 (citation omitted); see In re Troy S Poe Tr, 646 S.W.3d 771, 783 (Tex 2022) (Busby, J, concurring) (noting that “the right to a jury trial extends to disputed issues of fact in equitable . . . proceedings” even though “it is the trial court‘s role to determine the expediency, necessity, or propriety of equitable relief” (quotations and citations omitted)); Hill v. Shamoun & Norman, LLP, 544 S.W.3d 724, 741 (Tex. 2018) (“When contested fact issues must be resolved before equitable relief can be determined, a party is entitled to have that resolution made by a jury.”). Accordingly, even though jury findings on the disposition of property are merely advisory, the trial court‘s denial of Ray’s request for jury trial would be harmful if there were disputed fact issues concerning the “status of property” upon which the disposition of property is based. See id.
