In what circumstances will a court allow a plaintiff to vacate a final judgment against her attorney for failing to properly investigate her husband's classification as a separate property?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Marriage of Carter, In re, 19 Cal.App.3d 479, 97 Cal.Rptr. 274 (Cal. App. 1971):
In Jorgensen v. Jorgensen, the husband represented that certain shares of stock were his separate property when, in fact, they were mostly community property. In denying the wife the right to set aside a property settlement agreement, the court held that the wife must take her position and, if necessary, investigate the facts. The wife did not allege that her attorney intentionally failed to protect her property interests. Consequently she was barred from relief because she chose to rely on her husband's classification rather than undertake an independant investigation.
In Orlando v. Orlando, the husband stated that he had neither a bank account nor a safe deposit box. In permitting the wife to vacate the interlocutory and final judgments, the court stated (243 Cal.App.2d at p. 253, 52 Cal.Rptr. at p. 146):
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
