What you should know about Robert Houstons divorce lawyer: Is he a divorce lawyer?
The lawyer’s name is Robert H. Hutton, and he has a law practice in the Greater Houston area.
Hutton is the founder and president of the Houston Divorce Lawyer.
He is also the author of several books and other materials about divorce, and a regular speaker at conferences on divorce.
He is also a member of the Texas Divorce Lawyers Association and the Texas Bar Association.
“I want to thank all the people who are helping me with this case,” he told the Houston Chronicle.
“They are a wonderful group of people, and they’re giving me the best opportunity to get the right outcome.”
The Texas Bar is looking into Huttons involvement in the divorce case.
According to his biography on the Texas bar’s website, Hutton worked as a law clerk in the Harris County district attorney’s office for more than 20 years.
He then went on to become a partner in the Houston divorce firm, which has offices in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin.
Houstens first divorce was in 1991, and his second divorce was filed in 1998.
His first divorce, filed in 2006, was for $1.4 million.
Huitons third divorce was for a similar amount.
In 2006, Housts fourth divorce was reported as $2.8 million, but the final settlement of that case was $3.4 billion in 2010.
The court ordered that his fifth and sixth divorces be entered as final, according to court documents.
Houstons lawyers did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
The divorce case is not the only one in which Houstson is involved.
In January, his firm filed an appeal with the Texas Supreme Court arguing that a state judge who heard the divorce in 2008 should have disqualified Houston from taking on the case because of his financial difficulties.
Hontons lawyers argue that the state judge was prejudiced because he had a prior marriage.
Last week, Huitys lawyer in the Texas divorce case, John Riggs, called Houst’s lawyer “a fraud” in a Facebook post.
He called Hutton “a charlatan” and accused him of having “a history of being dishonest.”
“The court should have had the authority to disqualify him because of that record,” Riggs wrote.