The Texas Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower court's ruling that denied Chance M. Perry's petition to set aside his divorce decree from Courtney L. Perry. The court's decision, delivered on June 18, 2026, affects both parties involved in the divorce and highlights the importance of adhering to legal agreements made during divorce proceedings.

This case, identified as Chance M. Perry v. Courtney L. Perry, was filed under docket number 09-25-00333-CV. It marks the fourth time the couple has returned to court regarding their divorce, which was finalized in May 2023. The court's ruling emphasizes the challenges of overturning a divorce decree once it has been established, particularly when prior legal agreements, such as arbitration, are in place.

Background Information

Chance and Courtney Perry were divorced by a Final Decree of Divorce in May 2023, following a binding arbitration process. Chance initially appealed this decree but later dismissed his appeal. This led to a series of legal actions, including a petition for a writ of mandamus and another appeal regarding the trial court's orders related to the divorce.

In May 2024, Chance filed a Petition for Bill of Review, seeking to overturn the Final Decree of Divorce. He claimed that he was denied a jury trial and was compelled to participate in an arbitration process that he found to be unfair. In response, Courtney filed an answer asserting defenses of waiver and res judicata, arguing that Chance had already addressed these issues in his prior appeal.

The Ruling

The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that granted Courtney's Motion for Summary Judgment. The court stated, "Chance made no argument in the trial court, nor does he argue on appeal that there was a lack of notice," indicating that Chance failed to demonstrate that he was denied the opportunity to challenge the arbitration process or the divorce decree.

Judge Leanne Johnson, along with Chief Justice Golemon and Justice Wright, noted that Chance's claims were barred by the affirmative defenses of waiver and res judicata. The court concluded that Chance's failure to pursue his appeal or to challenge the divorce decree was due to his own choice, emphasizing that he had previously participated in the arbitration process without objection.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the principle that individuals involved in divorce proceedings must adhere to the agreements they make, particularly those related to arbitration. The court's decision highlights the importance of pursuing all available legal remedies in a timely manner. Failure to do so can result in the inability to challenge unfavorable outcomes later.

For future cases, this ruling serves as a reminder that courts do not readily grant bills of review, especially when the petitioner has previously had the opportunity to appeal. It illustrates the significance of adhering to procedural rules and the consequences of not doing so.

What's Next

Chance Perry may consider appealing this decision, although the court's ruling appears to firmly establish the legal precedent regarding the enforceability of arbitration agreements in divorce cases. Details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases pending.