In Clanin v. Clanin, 918 S.W.2d 673, 677 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1996, no writ), appellant complained that "such subjects as dispute resolution, the splitting 50/50 of the uninsured health care expenses of the children, awarding financial accounts solely in any one partys' name to that party, and other similar issues, were never mentioned in the agreement but appear in the final divorce decree." Id. at 677. The Fort Worth Court of Appeals, applying the aforementioned principles of partitioning the estate and following the mandates of the family code regarding the "just and right" division for the remainder of the estate, concluded that "the other provisions in the decree reflect the court's 'just and right' division of the rest of the community estate. None of these provisions either are beyond the scope of the agreement made by the parties or provide a basis for reversal." Id. at 678.