Sometimes, an expert CPA is not needed to trace separate property funds in an account. A spouse can testify and use documentation to prove that some or all of an account is his or her separate property.
Hurt v. Hurt, No. 14-23-00414-CV (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 7/17/2025)(mem. op.) is a July 2025 case that provides an example of a spouse tracing his own separate property funds. This is an except from that opinion:
Allen presented evidence that the opening balance of the Edward Jones account was approximately $242,000. He provided a copy of the check from the Scientific Drilling 401(k) account to Edward Jones, along with an Edward Jones deposit slip confirming receipt of that amount. Allen testified that all $242,000 came from contributions to his Scientific Drilling 401(k) account, which he rolled over into the Edward Jones account. He likewise presented a statement reflecting a withdrawal from the Scientific Drilling 401(k) in this amount and a resulting $0 balance. Allen testified that after he left Scientific Drilling in 2014, he made no further contributions to the 401(k) before rolling it into the Edward Jones account; thus, the entirety of the opening balance was comprised of pre-marriage funds.
Allen also provided evidence and testimony establishing that he similarly rolled the balance of his Precision Drilling 401(k)-$37,000-into another Edward Jones account in June 2017. Allen testified that he made no contributions to the Edward Jones account after the June 2017 rollover from the Precision Drilling 401(k). Again, Allen demonstrated that approximately $22,000 of the $37,000 came from pre-marriage contributions to the 401(k). According to the evidence, the final value of the Edward Jones account at the time of trial was approximately $338,000. Ultimately, Allen testified that $265,000 of the account balance was his separate property.
“A spouse is competent to testify concerning the characterization of property without producing independent documentation such as bank records.” Id. (quoting Pace v. Pace, 160 S.W.3d 706, 714 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2005, pet. denied)); see also see Vannerson v. Vannerson, 857 S.W.2d 659, 667-68 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, writ denied) (). Generally, “the clear and convincing standard is not satisfied by testimony that property possessed at the time the marriage is dissolved is separate property when that testimony is contradicted or unsupported by documentary evidence tracing the asserted separate nature of the property.” Kelly, 634 S.W.3d at 351 (internal quotations omitted); Graves v. Tomlinson, 329 S.W.3d 128, 139 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, pet. denied). However, this court has held that a spouse’s uncorroborated and uncontradicted testimony is sufficient to constitute clear and convincing evidence. In re Marriage of Mugford, No. 14-16-00436-CV, 2018 WL 2306737, at *10 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] May 22, 2018, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (citing Pace, 460 S.W.3d at 714). Here, Allen presented evidence supporting his testimony, and Leila did not produce any evidence or testimony to the contrary.
Further, the trial court stated in its findings of fact that it found Allen’s testimony to be “direct, forthcoming, and honest” as well as credible, while it found Leila’s testimony to be “self-serving, misleading, and dishonest” and not credible.