Any recourse after Decree of Divorce and Final Dissolution?

[lastdime]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ARKANSAS
Married 20 years, my ex-husband and I had 3-4 businesses, self-employed, all Sub-S corp. Various sizeable assests (heavy equipment, real estate, stocks, bonds). I was notifed anonymously via text-msg( it was his scorned lover) of his 2 yr affair. This was his 2nd, confirmed! He pleaded with me that we should work out the division of marital assets citing that a decision from a judge & 2 seperate atty's would diminish our assets considerable along w/their fees. Anyway, we used our business atty. I accepted service & waived my right to counsel, assuming he could advise or answer questions for me. WRONG. When I called him for some legaleze he said, no way, he represented my husband. Fast forward, I got nervous and proceeded to TRY to retain my own atty. Get this, because of my husband's profession, I could not find ONE(1) attorney that would represent me. Every one I contacted, consulted, made an appt with, stated it was a conflict of interest, why ? Future business, possible client, etc. So, now here I am. I signed the agreement, division of marital assets, property settlement. However, because I was self-employed (family-business)I'm out of a job, H.S. edu., 56 yrs old, no savings, 1/2 home value (whenever it sells) 1/2 stocks(PAYABLE AFTER the house sells, 1/2 CD (PAYABLE after the house sells). Home is debt-free, I can live here for 6 mo. before paying HIM 1/2 rent at market value. There's much more, but my question is, if I find an attorney someplace, somewhere to represent me, do I have ANY HOPE OF RECOURSE & who could I seek for advice? I still can't believe what & how this happened. Thank you for your response******************************************....whereshilary

 

[mistoffolees]

It doesn't seem very plausible that multiple attorneys would refuse to represent you simply because they might have some contact with him in the future. I suspect there's more to the story.

In any event, you waived representation and signed an agreement. You're not likely to be able to wiggle out of that. About the only thing that might reopen the agreement is if your ex grossly misrepresented his assets to the court. If he intentionally hid a significant amount of assets, you MIGHT get it reopened, but only if you have a good attorney.



(I'm assuming that the agreement was finalized by the judge because of the title of the thread. If it wasn't finalized by the judge then you need to get an attorney NOW and stop the process).

 

[lastdime]

Re:mistoffolees reply

What do you mean by "grossly misrepresented assets in court", there was never any hearing, trial, no financial statement seen or given to the Judge. I was told by the "joint"attorney to submit to him in writing my requests for whatever assets I felt I should be entitled and were agreed upon, only then the Judge/Court would grant a divorce, but nothing would be done until that occurred.

Yes, it is true. I could find NO attorney in my home town of 15K that would represent me and made many attempts to retain attorney outside my area within the state. I thought if I refrained from disclosing particular details I could at least get a consultation or referral, but when I was asked who my spouse was and his occupation, I was ALWAYS told, they wouldn't be able to help me, citing a possible conflict of interest, either past, present or future. I felt I had no recourse but to agree to the division of property and assets.

Perhaps I didn't do a good job of outlining the scenario. This isn't a case of, "gee, I should have negotiated for this, that, now I want it. My husband's attorney, our joint counsel, specifically stated, "in the state of Arkansas you must first live seperate and apart for 30 days, you must have a property settlement/agreement, then you petition for divorce. If the parties cannot come to a property settlement/agreement, the Judge will auction assets at a sheriff's sale, could I either afford that or manage until then?" Heck no. Clearly, I am grossly disadvantaged and could not . I had no source of income, no emergency funds available, no medical insurance, no transportation, no car, no longer employed (husband/wife business)and no prospects with no idea what the next step should be, and clearly with or without funds to retain a lawyer, no one would represent me and no one did! Please give me your thoughts. Thank you

 

[Ohiogal]

The attorney was not yours. He was your husband's. The fact that you assumed things is your fault. Ignorance of the law is NOT a defense or excuse. And it could have been a variety of different reasons why attorneys didn't want to meet with you -- your attempts not to disclose pertinent facts during the initial contact could be one. I know I wouldn't take a client who would hide relevant information from me.

The point is however, what is done is done. If your divorce is final then you are out of luck. YOU AGREED. The fact that you are now regretting agreeing means nothing.

 

[lastdime]

Re: Ohiogal reply

Thank you I appreciate your prompt reply. After many initial appointments and consultations to discuss my case had been made, then were suddenly cancelled when I was asked the nature of my husband's business, I felt it absolutely necessary to find out why and could only do that during a consultation which never happened. In response to 'the attorney was your husband's, he was a joint attorney. Why would a citizen, lay-man, not agree to use or refuse a joint attorney, one that was familiar with the family's history, aware of the family's financial status, both personal and professional. He did not disclose to me that I would not have be represented.

This joint attorney had an obligation to instruct me that it was not in my interest for him to jointly represent both parties and that having a joint attorney would not entitle me to any legal advice or opinion. He did not. Quite frankly, he misrepresented himself and scope of abilities. Not being able to retain legal counsel severely disadvantaged me. The fact is, I was unable to obtain ANY attorney, because if they represented me it might possibly jeopardize a future prospect. How could that encompass everyone I contacted? Well, it certainly did! Thank you again

 

[Ohiogal]

Thank you I appreciate your prompt reply. After many initial appointments and consultations to discuss my case had been made, then were suddenly cancelled when I was asked the nature of my husband's business, I felt it absolutely necessary to find out why and could only do that during a consultation which never happened. In response to 'the attorney was your husband's, he was a joint attorney. Why would a citizen, lay-man, not agree to use or refuse a joint attorney, one that was familiar with the family's history, aware of the family's financial status, both personal and professional. He did not disclose to me that I would not have be represented.

This joint attorney had an obligation to instruct me that it was not in my interest for him to jointly represent both parties and that having a joint attorney would not entitle me to any legal advice or opinion. He did not. Quite frankly, he misrepresented himself and scope of abilities. Not being able to retain legal counsel severely disadvantaged me. The fact is, I was unable to obtain ANY attorney, because if they represented me it might possibly jeopardize a future prospect. How could that encompass everyone I contacted? Well, it certainly did! Thank you again

You signed a waiver quite frankly and stated you agreed. That is a big issue. Also if the bolded is correct, file a COMPLAINT again the attorney with the Bar Association.

 

[nextwife]

You were already 34 when you married him, did you not accrue anything of your own BEFORE the marriage? NO savings? No retirement? Did you start looking for a job during the divorce? Did you wait until everything was final?

Being self employed does NOT make you unemployable, nor does being in one's 50s. I got a very nice job last year (and I'm 54) and have gone from self employment to getting a job for a bank. Hubby got a job at 60 (and oh, he was self employed before that). So, age has not stopped either of us - don't presume employers won't want you.

 

[mistoffolees]

The fact is, I was unable to obtain ANY attorney, because if they represented me it might possibly jeopardize a future prospect. How could that encompass everyone I contacted? Well, it certainly did!

That is unheard of - the the point of being absurd.

People are able to retain attorneys to sue General Electric or Exxon. Do you think that your ex-husband has more influence than GE or Exxon? Heck, people are able to retain attorneys to sue the US government, state governments, local governments, and so on. Do you really think that your ex-husband has more influence than any of those?

I think you really need to look at yourself and your own actions - particularly in how you presented your case. I agree that if it looked like you were hiding things (which you admitted to), that alone would cause many attorneys to walk away. Every divorce attorney I know is busy - and will walk away from cases that look like more trouble than they're worth, including clients who are hard to work with. I just don't think your husband's status is likely to be the culprit.

 

[LdiJ]

That is unheard of - the the point of being absurd.

People are able to retain attorneys to sue General Electric or Exxon. Do you think that your ex-husband has more influence than GE or Exxon? Heck, people are able to retain attorneys to sue the US government, state governments, local governments, and so on. Do you really think that your ex-husband has more influence than any of those?

I think you really need to look at yourself and your own actions - particularly in how you presented your case. I agree that if it looked like you were hiding things (which you admitted to), that alone would cause many attorneys to walk away. Every divorce attorney I know is busy - and will walk away from cases that look like more trouble than they're worth, including clients who are hard to work with. I just don't think your husband's status is likely to be the culprit.

I actually believe her. I have experienced very small town America. Most likely there are only a handful of attorneys in their town as it is, and if her husband is a big shot in the town, probably most of the attorneys would either have a potential conflict, or would not want to risk their own careers by representing her. She would have needed someone far enough away that they would not be effected or have a potential conflict.

 

[lastdime]

Re: LdiJ reply: Thank you, it's about time

My ex-husband is a big-shot, arrogant and quite threatening. I never withheld any information at any time from the receptionists. I merely 'hoped' the receptionist after asking me who I was and who my husband was, would not ask his occupation. After being turned down to even make an appointment, I was hoping that locating an attorney at the other end of the state would improve my chances that there would be no way they could tell me it was a "conflict of interest".

Prior to marriage at 35, I had a full time career, my own home, savings, etc. After I married, I gave up that career, sold my home, relocated across country with my husband and worked side-by-side building a business, we were a team. I had accumulated many assets, but there was no reason to keep them individually or seperate, it was a joint venture, a marriage/partnership. After a while, even though I was still working 100% in that business, corp officer/shareholder my husband would FORGET to inform me of critical financial commitments and obligations. I asked, then requested, then demanded ! Perhaps I am ignorant of the law and just a sore loser because I really feel like I was taken advantage of. I appreciate all your responses and thank you all for listening to my situation and clarifying some facts for me. lastdime

 

[Ronin]

I was hoping that locating an attorney at the other end of the state would improve my chances that there would be no way they could tell me it was a "conflict of interest"...

While in this case you may have no choice, the kind of small town politics described here is especially difficult, because even if a good attorney is brought in from out of town, they are often at a disadvantage as "an outsider".

 

[LdiJ]

While in this case you may have no choice, the kind of small town politics described here is especially difficult, because even if a good attorney is brought in from out of town, they are often at a disadvantage as "an outsider".

However, that is where appeals can be particularly useful...assuming that the judge has made the decision rather than an agreement being made. Even small town judges don't last long if they are constantly being overturned on appeal. While an outsider is at a disadvantage, that same outsider isn't stuck with dealing with the judge all the time, therefore the outsider would have no problem letting the judge know that there WOULD be an appeal if an unfair ruling was made. You cannot appeal an agreement, you can only re-open it if something was concealed.

Since the OP made an agreement, and obviously nothing was concealed from her, she is stuck.