Tennessee Ex-Husband’s Claim of Divorce Fraud Denied

Tennessee law case summary on post-divorce allegations of fraud in Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

Edward Joseph Warwick, Sr. v. Katherine Dodge Gribben Warwick, Et Al – Tennesse post-divorce action for fraud

Edward Joseph Warwick, Sr., the husband, and Katherine Dodge Gribben Warwick, the wife, were married for over ten years and had two children when they separated in 2008, soon after the husband discovered that the wife was having an extramarital affair.   The husband received treatment for a variety of psychological problems, including his discovery of the wife’s affair and was diagnosed with “post-traumatic stress order.”   A divorce was ultimately granted and the marital property divided.   Following the divorce, the husband and wife sued each other back and forth over numerous issues, including claims that the husband put spyware on the wife’s computer.

In December 2010, the husband filed a suit against the wife, claiming that she and her attorney engaged in a conspiracy against him, which included fraud on the court, abuse of process and intentional infliction of emotional distress.    Included in this list of acts by the wife were claims that she omitted assets she owned from the marital estate, submitted an affidavit which her attorney knew was full of lies, and that she violated an order of the court when she purchased a new home and chose a new counselor for the children without the father’s consent.    The husband’s complaint asserts that each of these claims of fraud was made intentionally to keep him and the court unaware of the real facts and as a result, the Court reached a wrong conclusion, and he, the husband, suffered harm and damages.  The husband asked for loss of wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, unnecessary attorney’s fees for the protracted and “unnecessary” litigation, medical bills, and loss of business income as a result of the wife’s (and her attorney’s) “campaign” to destroy him.

The wife and her attorney denied all of the husband’s claims.  The wife argued that the issues brought had already been litigated in the divorce trial and that the statute of limitations had passed.  The wife and her attorney then filed a joint motion for judgment on the pleadings, further claiming that the husband did not state a cause of action.

The trial court dismissed the husband’s claims, holding that the statute of limitations passed or that the “complaint failed to state a claim” or both.  The court said “without an underlying tort, the civil conspiracy claim does not state a cause of action.”  The husband appealed.

Appeal Denied – No Tort Exists

The husband argued that he did indeed state a claim and that the facts of the case were clearly stated and legally sufficient to give him a cause of action.  The husband based his first claim on Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02, but the appeals court held that any “fraud-based action seeking money damages, by whatever label, is not available under Rule 60.02” and agreed with the trial court that the claim of fraud should be dismissed.

The appeals court also rejected the husband’s “abuse of process” claim.  The husband argued that the wife used the court and the court process to harass and intimidate him, citing, her claims that he put spyware on her computer and her request for a restraining order against him.  The appeals court required two conditions to be met to support a claim of abuse of process.  The first is the existence of an ulterior motive by the defendant, which the appeals court said the husband proved.  The second element is “an act in the use of process other than such as would be proper.”  The appeals court, however, held that merely initiating the process by filing a motion or complaint is not sufficient and a claim for abuse depends on the court giving some order, showing that the authority of the court was used for an improper purpose.   In all of the examples the husband cited, no abuse of process took place.

The appeals court also rejected the husband’s claim that the wife and her attorney intentionally inflicted emotional distress.  The three criteria for proving this claim are that the person’s conduct was intentional or reckless, that the behavior was so outrageous that it would not be “tolerated by civilized society” and that it resulted in serious mental injury to the plaintiff.   The appeals court held that even if the husband’s claims about the wife’s behavior are true (including incitement of friends and the couple’s children, lying and false allegations of rape and abuse), and even if they did cause him emotional harm, her behavior was not “beyond all possible bounds of decency” according to society’s standards today, and therefore he had no cause of action.  Because there is no tort claim, the husband’s claim for civil conspiracy also falls.

No. E2011-01969-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2012).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

The Miles Mason Family Law Group handles Tennessee divorce, child support, alimony, child custody, and parent relocation.  Download our free e-Book,Your First Steps: 7 Steps Planning Your Tennessee Divorce.  A Memphis divorce lawyer from the Miles Mason Family Law Group can help.  To schedule your confidential consultation, call us today at (901) 683-1850.