Claim of Duress and Being Forced to Sign Settlement Not Credible

Tennessee case summary on duress and settlement enforcement in divorce.

Wife vs. Husband (names removed upon request)

The wife in this Sullivan County, Tennessee, case filed for divorce in February 2013.  In May of that year, her first attorney was permitted to withdraw.  After her second attorney died, she asked for a continuance, which was granted, and the case was set for trial in January 2014.

Citing medical reasons, the wife asked for another continuance, which was also granted.  But in April 2014, her new attorney also asked to withdraw from the case.  The court set a new trial date for July 2014, but granted one last continuance, since the wife had hired yet another attorney.  Trial was set for August, and the court warned that no other continuances would be granted.

As the trial approached, the parties agreed to mediation, and they reached an agreement at mediation.  That agreement called for the husband to pay alimony of $1,000 per month for 48 months.  It also split the parties’ marital assets.

In October, the wife sent a letter to the court to protest the mediation, and argued that she was “forced to sign” the agreement.

A hearing was held, and the court was initially concerned that the crime of false imprisonment might have been committed by the wife’s attorney.  It called the mediator as a witness, who testified that he witnessed no such conduct.  After hearing the evidence, the court granted the divorce, and incorporated the agreement.

The wife, through yet another attorney, made one more motion to modify the judgment, which was denied.  She then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

On appeal, the wife argued that she had established a case of duress or lack of mental capacity, and that the marital termination agreement should not have been enforced for that reason.

The appeals court examined the wife’s evidence on the issue of duress.  The wife claimed that the husband had threatened her, but the husband denied these allegations.  The trial court had found that it “flat out” did not credit the wife’s testimony, and that her testimony was simply not credible.  Since the trial court is in the best position to make judgments as to credibility, the appeals court found that the evidence supported the finding.

Similarly, the appeals court found that the wife had not established her claim of mental incompetency.  The wife presented only conclusory statements that she was unable to make clear decisions, and the appeals court agreed that she had not met her burden.

After reviewing all of the evidence, the Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court had acted properly, and affirmed the judgment.  It assessed the costs of appeal against the wife.

No. E2015-00758-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see The Tennessee Divorce Process: How Divorces Work Start to Finish.