904 N.W.2d 384
Wis. Ct. App.2017Background
- Jeffery and Shirley lived together from 1989, married in 2002, separated in 2013, and divorced after a July 2, 2015 trial date where they ultimately announced a settlement on the record and entered judgment.
- At trial Jeffery sought to exclude over $100,000 from marital division as nonmarital gifts from his parents; the trial court reminded him that he bore the burden to prove any claimed exemption.
- After judgment, Shirley produced a box of account statements she previously had not turned over; Jeffery moved under Wis. Stat. § 806.07 (citing § 805.15(3)) to reopen the judgment based on those financial documents as newly discovered evidence.
- Shirley moved to dismiss Jeffery's motion and separately sought sanctions under Wis. Stat. § 802.05 (civil frivolousness).
- The postjudgment court denied Jeffery's motion to reopen and denied Shirley's sanctions motion; Jeffery appealed the denial to reopen as erroneous, and Shirley cross-appealed the denial of sanctions arguing the court applied the wrong legal standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether postjudgment court erred by denying Jeffery's motion to reopen the divorce judgment based on financial records Shirley produced after trial | Wenzel: records were newly discovered after trial, would have altered property division, and he exercised diligence in seeking them | Shirley: records were not newly discovered in a way that satisfies § 805.15(3); Jeffery was not diligent and records were not material to proving gifts | Court affirmed: Jeffery failed to show diligence and failed to show the records were material to proving the funds were gifted, so newly discovered-evidence relief was not established |
| Whether the postjudgment court applied the correct legal standard in denying Shirley's motion for sanctions under Wis. Stat. § 802.05 | Shirley: sanctions for frivolous pleading under § 802.05(2)–(3) govern and civil procedure controls; court should apply frivolousness standard | Jeffery: court denied sanctions for other reasons and contends Shirley’s procedural approach was imperfect | Court reversed: postjudgment court applied divorce-fee standard (Holbrook) instead of the civil frivolousness standard; remanded to apply the correct § 802.05 standard |
Key Cases Cited
- Franke v. Franke, 268 Wis. 2d 360 (discussing family court authority to modify property division)
- Conrad v. Conrad, 92 Wis. 2d 407 (family court power to reopen divorce judgment)
- Nelson v. Taff, 175 Wis. 2d 178 (standard of review for postjudgment discretionary decisions)
- Lee v. GEICO Indem. Co., 321 Wis. 2d 698 (unchanged review framework for discretionary rulings)
- Kocinski v. Home Ins. Co., 147 Wis. 2d 728 (newly discovered evidence requires satisfying all § 805.15(3) factors)
- Brandt v. Brandt, 145 Wis. 2d 394 (elements required to prove gifted property in divorce)
- Jandrt v. Jerome Foods, Inc., 227 Wis. 2d 531 (standard for reviewing frivolousness sanctions under civil rules)
- Holbrook v. Holbrook, 103 Wis. 2d 327 (criteria for awarding attorney fees in divorce proceedings)