Sign Up for Vincent AI
Wikle v. Boyd
Charles Neville Reese of Reese & Reese Attorneys, P.C., Daleville, for appellant.
Jason R. Brogden of The Brodgen Law Firm, L.L.C., Ozark, for appellee.
Jonathan B. Wikle ("the former husband") and Hilary Boyd ("the former wife") were divorced by a 2011 judgment ("the 2011 divorce judgment") of the Dale Circuit Court ("the trial court"), which incorporated an agreement of the parties ("the divorce agreement") relating to the division of their assets. The divorce agreement reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
In March or April 2017, the former husband stopped paying the former wife amounts that she claimed he owed her under the terms of the 2011 divorce judgment, and the former wife filed in the trial court a complaint seeking to have the former husband held in contempt and seeking enforcement of several provisions of the 2011 divorce judgment. The former husband answered the former wife's complaint, contending, among other things, that the former wife had concealed certain facts at the time of the execution of the divorce agreement. The former husband also sought a modification of the 2011 divorce judgment, based upon the former wife's remarriage in 2013, to terminate the payments due to her under paragraph (2)(B) of the divorce agreement, which he characterized as support and maintenance payments.
At trial, the former husband contended that the trial court could "relieve a fraud in the formation of a divorce," asserting, essentially, that a part of his answer to the former wife's complaint had been a "defensive" Rule 60(b), Ala. R. Civ. P., motion requesting an order setting aside the 2011 divorce judgment based on the former wife's alleged misrepresentation about her relationship with another man at the time of the execution of the divorce agreement and the entry of the 2011 divorce judgment. Because the former husband contended that he had discovered the former wife's alleged fraud in early 2017, he argued that he had two years from that date to seek to set aside the divorce judgment. See Spindlow v. Spindlow, 512 So. 2d 918, 920 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987) (). In addition, the former husband, who had only recently retired from active duty in the United States Army at the time of the trial, asserted that 50 U.S.C. § 3936(a), a part of the Servicemembers' Civil Relief Act, codified at 50 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq., tolled any limitations period under Rule 60(b) until he was no longer an active-duty servicemember, thus permitting him to bring his Rule 60(b) claim regardless of the expiration of any limitations period.
After the conclusion of the trial, the trial court entered a judgment that, among other things, found the former husband in contempt of certain provisions of the 2011 divorce judgment and ordered him to pay certain sums to the former wife. The trial court also denied the former husband's request to set aside the 2011 divorce judgment on the ground of fraud. The trial court specifically found that the former husband had not filed a Rule 60(b) motion and that, if the statement regarding fraud in his answer could be construed as a Rule 60(b) motion, the motion was untimely. In addition, the trial court rejected the application of § 3936(a),...
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting