Sunday, November 8, 2020

The Sturggle

It is going to be a long few months for me. I have filed a motion to, among other things, set aside the 2012 court order which included permanent spousal support. Spring has also filed a motion against me asking for even more money. My motion should be a slam dunk given the clear evidence of fraud upon the court committed by my ex-wife and her lawyer along with the Minnesota state statute which specifically says court orders in family court can be set aside for fraud upon the court with no statute of limitations. See below. In addition, the very idea that a person who was not the primary parent during the marriage according to custody evaluator and who could make make just as much money as me according to the vocational evaluation would receive permanent alimony after taking the majority of marital assets, despite not contributing anything to their accumulation, is simply beyond belief.  

I know many divorced people and not one of them pays or receives alimony. The only ones who receive child support are those who have sole custody of the children. Yet I had to pay Spring child support even though I had the kids the majority of the time. 

Unfortunately my experience is that the facts, truth, the law, and justice are not particularly important factors when judges rule. The good thing is that no matter how the court rules, this living nightmare will soon end. 


Subd. 2.Reopening. On motion and upon terms as are just, the court may relieve a party from a judgment and decree, order, or proceeding under this chapter, except for provisions dissolving the bonds of marriage, annulling the marriage, or directing that the parties are legally separated, and may order a new trial or grant other relief as may be just for the following reasons:

(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under the Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 59.03;

(3) fraud, whether denominated intrinsic or extrinsic, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party;

(4) the judgment and decree or order is void; or

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment and decree or order upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment and decree or order should have prospective application.

The motion must be made within a reasonable time, and for a reason under clause (1), (2), or (3), not more than one year after the judgment and decree, order, or proceeding was entered or taken. A motion under this subdivision does not affect the finality of a judgment and decree or order or suspend its operation. This subdivision does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment and decree, order, or proceeding or to grant relief to a party not actually personally notified as provided in the Rules of Civil Procedure, or to set aside a judgment for fraud upon the court.

No comments:

Post a Comment