Cases

Representing the husband in a post-dissolution family law proceeding, GMSR prevailed on wife’s appeal from the superior court’s order denying her motion to set aside their marital settlement agreement.  Wife and her counsel  had prepared and presented to then-unrepresented husband all preliminary disclosures and the marital settlement agreement.  In that agreement, she received all three family homes plus a time share and the majority of cash and cars; he received all stock and options of his startup company. Wife sought to set aside the judgment for husband’s purported nondisclosure of stock options or their true value. The superior court found that in fact the options had been disclosed and wife’s claims as to value were too late, beyond the one year should-have-known limitation.

In an unpublished decision, the Court of Appeal adopted GMSR’s argument that the wife was charged with knowing the existence of the stock options enumerated in the agreement she had prepared and of any purported misrepresentation as to their value in that same document.

Case Briefs

• Marriage of Liu A155732M - View Document