Palihawadange Fernando v. Martha Gay Weaver Sapukotana
179 So. 3d 1105
| Miss. | 2015Background
- Sarath (Sri Lankan) married Fernando in 1992; Sarath moved to the U.S. in 1993 and a Florida court entered an uncontested divorce in 1995 based on a signed waiver of process.
- Sarath later married Martha in Mississippi in 2004; he died intestate in 2008 from a traffic accident and Martha was appointed administratrix of his estate in Wayne County Chancery Court.
- Fernando claims she learned of the 1995 Florida divorce only after Sarath’s death, alleges the waiver was forged and the Florida decree void for lack of jurisdiction, and seeks to vacate the chancery court’s appointment of Martha.
- Fernando initially moved to vacate the Florida judgment in Broward County (2009) but withdrew the motion; she later filed motions in Arizona federal court and in Mississippi chancery court. Federal courts refused intervention; Arizona wrongful-death suit was settled after the estate was dismissed.
- The Wayne County Chancery Court struck Fernando’s motion because it was signed only by Premalal (a foreign lawyer not admitted pro hac vice) and granted Martha’s counterclaim, holding the court must give Full Faith and Credit to the Florida divorce. Fernando’s motion to vacate that chancery judgment was denied and she appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Fernando's Argument | Martha/Chancery's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 1995 Florida divorce | Waiver was forged; Florida court lacked personal/subject-matter jurisdiction; decree void for fraud | Florida decree presumptively valid; no complete Florida record; Full Faith and Credit prevents collateral attack here | Court held chancery lacked authority to vacate sister-state divorce; must give Full Faith and Credit; decree stands |
| Whether Mississippi court could hear collateral attack | Wayne County was proper forum to decide estate beneficiary and challenge the decree | Divorce challenges should be brought in the rendering court (Florida) which has better access to records | Held: Florida has greater interest and access; Mississippi court could not nullify the decree without full record |
| Standing/representation to file motion in Mississippi | Fernando relied on power of attorney signed by foreign attorney Premalal to file motion | Martha argued due process/Rules require licensed counsel or pro hac vice admission; filings must be signed by a licensed attorney | Court struck motion: Premalal not licensed/pro hac vice; power of attorney does not authorize practice of law in Mississippi |
| Timeliness / equitable defenses (laches/statute) | Fernando argued she only learned of divorce after 2008 death; her challenge was timely once discovered | Martha argued laches/statute and strong presumption of validity given later remarriage(s) by Sarath | Court found laches/statute bar and strong presumption of validity; procedural delays and withdrawal of Florida challenge fatal |
Key Cases Cited
- Pierce v. Pierce, 132 So. 3d 553 (Miss. 2014) (standard of appellate review for chancery court findings)
- Dinet v. Gavagnie, 948 So. 2d 1281 (Miss. 2007) (Mississippi rule requiring licensed-attorney signature and pro hac vice limits)
- Global Oceanic Enters., Inc. v. Hynum, 857 So. 2d 659 (Miss. 2003) (distinguishing intrinsic vs. extrinsic fraud for attacking sister-state judgments)
- Cook v. Cook, 342 U.S. 126 (U.S. 1951) (burden on party assailing a sister-state decree is heavy)
- Estin v. Estin, 334 U.S. 541 (U.S. 1948) (states’ strong interest in regulating marital status of domiciliaries)
- Nichols v. Sauls’ Estate, 165 So. 2d 352 (Miss. 1964) (presumption of regularity for notarized acknowledgments)
- Daniel-Nordin v. Nordin, 495 N.W. 2d 318 (Wis. 1993) (divorce decrees are best challenged in the rendering court)