Meus Sr. v. Meus (2019) & the Benefits of Marital Settlement Agreements

When it comes to resolving disputes in divorce, reaching a private agreement with is almost always the ideal solution. When parties resolve issues between themselves privately, outside the courtroom, this generally saves time, money, and energy. Litigating issues in court is not only expensive, it is highly demanding in terms of the time and effort required. Developing a marital settlement agreement is usually the best route to take, although resolving issues in this way isn’t always possible. If you do manage to create a settlement agreement, it is imperative that you be ready to fully commit to the terms of that agreement. You need to completely understand and be completely supportive of the final terms, because the terms of a properly executed settlement agreement cannot be unilaterally revoked, at least not without exceptional circumstances (i.e. fraud, duress, etc.).

In the case of Meus Sr. v. Meus (2019), a husband was disappointed when he was ultimately unable to unilaterally revoke the child support terms of a marital settlement agreement. Let’s look at this case in a bit of detail to take away its key lessons.

Overview of Meus Sr. v. Meus (2019)

The couple in this case had one daughter, born in 2010, and then in 2016 the wife initiated divorce. Soon after the divorce was initiated, the couple was able to achieve a private settlement agreement with respect to the marital issues. The agreement held that the couple would share joint custody, and also gave specific amounts regarding child support. The agreement was reviewed in court, and was then incorporated into the final divorce judgment. After this judgment was made, the husband then tried to object to the terms of the settlement agreement. Specifically, the husband tried to object to the child support amount, contending that the amount was over 500% of what it should have been. The husband lost his motion to overturn the judgment, and then case went before the appellate division for review.

Outcome & Discussion

The appellate division ruled against the husband. The primary reason cited by the appellate division was the fact that the husband had clearly expressed approval of the settlement agreement’s terms during the trial. Although the husband later tried to argue that he hadn’t consented to the terms, the record at trial showed that the husband gave clear approval when the terms were openly read and reviewed in court. The husband only tried to express disapproval after the agreement had already been finalized and firmly incorporated into the final divorce decree. Furthermore, not only did the record show that the husband agreed in court, the development of the agreement itself showed that he participated in creating the terms. The settlement agreement came about after the terms were discussed and revised by the attorneys of the parties. There was no reason to believe that the husband wasn’t fully aware of the amount of child support which was put into the agreement.

Again, the clear lesson here is that parties need to thoroughly review any agreement which they sign and commit to. Although the husband tried to argue that he was unaware of the terms, and that he never gave approval, the record contradicted his account. The likely scenario is that he simply realized later how much of a financial impact the child support amount would have, and then later regretted that term of the agreement. Unfortunately for him, that’s simply not how these agreements operate.

Connect with the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Information

If you want more information about marital settlement agreements, or another related matter, get in touch with one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-9311.