 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Marriage of Shanks3/14/2001
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Michael S. Walsh, Judge.
The respondent appeals a district court order denying her petition to modify the child support provisions of the parties' dissolution decree and her petition to vacate the decree.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
The respondent-appellant, Lora Shanks, appeals a district court order denying her petition to vacate a dissolution decree and her alternative motion to modify the decree. She claims the district court erred in: (1) granting Randall Shanks' motion for summary judgment and dismissing her petition to vacate the decree without first permitting her to conduct discovery; (2) failing to require him to make a full financial disclosure; (3) failing to increase Randall's child support obligation; (4) failing to admit evidence produced by Firstar Bank pursuant to a subpoena; (5) modifying the college support provisions of the decree; and (6) ordering her to repay Randall for health insurance premiums he mistakenly paid. Lora requests an award of trial and appellate attorney fees. Randall requests an award of appellate attorney fees. We affirm as modified.
I. Factual Background and Proceedings.
Randall and Lora Shanks are the parents of two minor children: Emily, born December 29, 1986, and Mallory, born April 26, 1988. Randall, an attorney, filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in March of 1996. Trial of the matter was scheduled for May 1, 1997. On April 30, 1997, the parties, their attorneys, and a district court judge conducted a settlement conference. After six hours of negotiations, the parties reached agreement as to all issues except the Christmas Day visitation schedule. The parties made a record of their agreement in the presence of the court and agreed to submit the remaining visitation issue to the judge for decision. On May 7, 1997, Lora advised Randall through counsel that she intended to withdraw from the agreement reached during the settlement conference. Randall filed a motion requesting enforcement of the settlement and entry of a decree of dissolution. In her resistance, Lora alleged the agreement had been obtained through fraud, misrepresentation, unconscionable behavior, or mistake. In particular, she alleged Randall had orally agreed prior to April 30, 1997, to settle a client's personal injury claim (the "Jensen case") for $1,000,000; but he had wrongfully failed to disclose this fact to her before or during the settlement conference. Lora requested leave to withdraw from the settlement and an opportunity to undertake discovery to establish when the tort claim had been settled.
On May 8, 1997, a hearing was held on Randall's motion to enforce the settlement of the dissolution action. On June 5, 1997, the district court entered an order granting the motion, and filed a decree of dissolution incorporating the terms of the agreement reached by the parties on April 30, 1997, and resolving the Christmas visitation issue. The court found, inter alia: (1) both parties were well-represented by counsel during discovery, all hearings and the settlement conference; (2) there were no pending motions or issues relative to discovery on April 30, 1997; (3) the parties were prepared for trial that would have occurred on May 1, 1997, if the case had not been settled as a result of the settlement conference; (4) Lora and her counsel had full knowledge of the Jensen case; (5) Randall made full disclosure to permit Lora and her counsel to undertake valuation of the law practice and the Jensen case; (6) Randall "has not engaged in concealment of material information, fraud, misrepresentation, wrongdoing, or unconscionable behavior;" and (7) "the settlement ag
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|