Kelley v. Kelley
147 So. 3d 597
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Gordon Kelley III challenges two Florida orders dismissing actions to invalidate his father's power-of-appointment exercise under the Kelley Trust.
- Gordon Jr. allegedly married Joanna Kelley but his 1979 Nevada divorce from a prior wife is attacked as void for Nevada residency noncompliance, potentially making his marriage to Joanna bigamous.
- Gordon III contends the Nevada decree is subject to collateral attack in Florida and should be deemed void due to lack of residency and jurisdiction in Nevada.
- Nevada law prohibits third-party attacks on divorce decrees binding on the parties, which would bar Gordon III's collateral attack.
- The trial court dismissed the counts seeking to attack the Nevada decree; the Florida appeals consolidated the cases for review.
- The court analyzes full faith and credit, focusing on whether the foreign judgment had jurisdiction and whether collateral attack was permissible under Nevada law and Florida law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Nevada divorce decree is entitled to full faith and credit in Florida | Gordon III argues the Nevada decree is void due to lack of residency and jurisdiction. | Gordon Jr. and Burguieres complied with Nevada procedures; the decree is binding and entitled to full faith and credit. | Yes; full faith and credit applies when the foreign court had jurisdiction. |
| Whether Gordon III may collaterally attack a foreign divorce decree in Florida | Gordon III asserts the decree can be attacked since Nevada may have lacked jurisdiction due to residency issues. | Nevada prohibits third-party attacks on decrees binding on the parties; res judicata bars Gordon III. | No; Nevada's prohibition and res judicata bar collateral attack. |
| Whether Kant controls a Florida collateral-attack standing analysis for a child of the decedent | Gordon III cites Kant to claim standing to impeach a foreign divorce decree in Florida if it affects a subsequent marriage. | Kant does not apply given Full Faith and Credit; Kant predates the issue of giving foreign judgments full faith and credit. | Kant distinguished; under Full Faith and Credit, collateral attack requires foreign-law basis, which Gordon III lacks. |
Key Cases Cited
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hague, 449 U.S. 302 (1981) (full faith and credit transformation of states; jurisdiction required)
- Underwriters Nat'l Assurance Co. v. N.C. Life & Accident & Health Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 455 U.S. 691 (1982) (jurisdictional basis required for crediting foreign judgments)
- Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., 442 So.2d 182 (Fla.1983) (full faith and credit limitations; lack of jurisdiction defeats credit)
- Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343 (1948) (res judicata and collateral attack depending on participation)
- Coe v. Coe, 334 U.S. 378 (1948) (collateral attack constraints in foreign judgments)
- Madden v. Cosden, 314 A.2d 128 (Md. 1974) (statutory bar on third-party attacks to foreign decrees)
- In re Estate of Kant, 272 So.2d 153 (Fla.1972) (standing to impeach foreign divorce where interests prejudiced)
- Colby v. Colby, 369 P.2d 1019 (Nev. 1962) (intrinsic vs extrinsic fraud in divorce annulment context)
- Confer v. Second Judicial Dist. Court in & for Washoe Cty., 234 P.2d 688 (Nev. 1925) (fraud distinctions in divorce proceedings)