"I Shouldn't Have Signed!"

Rose was married to Marshall her entire adult life. He handled all of the couple's finances. The couple was in their early 70's and their children were grown. When Marshall suggested that his business attorney handle the separation agreement, Rose agreed. Her husband provided a list of his assets but it was never verified with documentation. Rose did not want to divorce her husband so she consented to the separation agreement.

Three months later Rose came to my office for a consultation. Rose was concerned about what she had signed, and believed that there was more money than her husband had revealed. Rose discovered that Marshall had a pension that was never mentioned in the agreement. She also stated she was ready for a divorce. I advised her that it was extremely difficult to open up a signed and notarized agreement. However, there were certain factors in Rose's situation that persuaded me to file an action for divorce and to open up the agreement.

The factors were Rose had no independent representation; The attorney that the parties utilized was not impartial because he had a business relationship with Marshall; The agreement was not based on full financial disclosure; There was no signed and notarized net worth statement from Marshall; The agreement did not include at least one major asset - in this case her husband's pension.

We filed a summons and complaint for a divorce, maintenance, equitable distribution and attorney fees. We also brought a motion to open up the separation agreement. In addition to the factors above, I described in the motion papers the length of the marriage, the dependency of Rose on Marshall during the marriage and the fact that Marshall had control of and knowledge of the finances. We did not know where Marshall kept all of his investments. However, Rose did know it was in mutual funds. We subpoenaed eight of the major financial institutions for any and all documents and accounts of Marshall. We gave his full name and social security. We received prompt responses from the institutions and discovered accounts that were not listed in the agreement.

The court overturned the agreement and held the husband responsible for Rose's legal fees. I was then able to negotiate a much more equitable agreement that also included distribution of the newly discovered assets.