Fraud In a Divorce: Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts

No image available
In a case that clarifies the court’s power to address acts of fraud, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal originating in Mobile County. This case, Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts, addresses fraud in the context of a divorce judgment, emphasizing the court’s authority to handle such scenarios.

In a case that clarifies the court’s power to address acts of fraud, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal originating in Mobile County. This case, Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts, addresses fraud in the context of a divorce judgment, emphasizing the court’s authority to handle such scenarios.

The father, Gage Bruce Roberts, and the mother, Taylor Rose Roberts, were divorced in March 2023. The judgment incorporated a previous agreement from December 2022, awarding joint legal custody to both parents and sole physical custody to the father. Under the agreement, the mother was exempted from paying child support, and the father was allowed to relocate to Wisconsin. However, following the initial agreement, the parents signed a separate notarized parenting agreement in January 2023. Under the new agreement, the parents shared physical custody with weekly alternations, requiring the father to remain in Alabama unless both parents consented to relocation. Despite this later agreement, the father moved to Wisconsin with the children in August 2023, leading the mother to seek sole physical custody. The trial court awarded temporary custody to the mother in February 2024. The father subsequently petitioned for a writ of mandamus, claiming the trial court lacked jurisdiction to alter the custody arrangement from the original divorce judgment.

On appeal, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reviewed the trial court’s jurisdiction under Rule 60(b) of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. This rule allows relief from judgments obtained by fraud. The Court explained that, although the mother was not explicitly seeking Rule 60(b) relief in her petition, her allegations suggested fraud by the father, making the rule relevant. The allegations were supported by the father’s own admission that he had misled the mother about his intentions, leading her to believe that he intended to stay in Alabama when he truly intended to move to Wisconsin. Ultimately, the Court found sufficient basis to deny the father’s mandamus petition, affirming the trial court’s custody and support modifications. The Court noted that the mother’s petition could be treated as an independent action for fraud, allowing three years for the mother to file.

Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts illustrates the ways in which fraud can impact jurisdiction, as well as divorce judgments themselves. The presence of fraud expands the duration of the court’s jurisdiction over the judgment, allowing three years for courts to reassess. Fraudulent judgments can be overturned and replaced with judgments that reflect the true circumstances and agreements between parties.

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Ingram Law LLC at 205-335-2640. Get Relief Get Results.

articles

latest news & insights

1 / 9
David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

In a case that made its way to the highest level of the state court system, the Alabama Supreme Court recently presided over an appeal beginning in Walker County. This case, Ex parte David Eugene Files, centers around a Rule 32 petition for postconviction relief. Files’ petition was dismissed by the Walker circuit court, with the dismissal being affirmed by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

read articles
Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

In a decision that affirms the admissibility and sufficiency of several distinct types of evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently presided over an appeal that found its roots in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

read articles
Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

How courts divide real property in a divorce. Learn more from Ingram Law, LLC.

read articles
Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

In a case that demonstrates the limits of alimony awards, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently heard the case of Larry Shearry v. Christy Spivey, as personal representative of the Estate of Charlotte Shearry.

read articles
Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

You are driving home late between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. You get pulled over because the police officer states you are driving over the line, driving too slow, have a head light out or you have a taillight out.

read articles
latest-news

The Crime of Stalking in Alabama

Another category of criminal offense in Alabama is stalking. Covered by Article 5, stalking includes offenses for stalking in the first and second degree, aggravated stalking in the first and second degree, and electronic stalking in the first and second degree.

read articles
Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

In a case that demonstrates the intricacies of equitable division of marital property, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court in Jefferson County. The case of Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown illustrates the importance of maintaining a clear record on appeal and emphasizes the necessity of full disclosure when dividing marital assets.

read articles
Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

In a case illustrating the tumultuous and complicated proceedings for challenging a death sentence, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently heard the appeal of Brett Richard Yeiter v. State of Alabama, stemming from Escambia County. Yeiter’s case underscores the critical need to adhere to procedural requirements, especially in cases involving severe sentences.

read articles
latest-news

Trademark Infringement: Causes of Action Under the Lanham Act

Federal trademark law is primarily governed by the Lanham Trademark Act, also referred to as the Trademark Act of 1946. The Lanham Act, codified in 15 U.S.C. §§1051 to 1127, covers a wide range of trademark issues including registration, maintenance, protection, and the creation of a federal cause of action for trademark infringement.

read articles

schedule a consultation

Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo

Your path to get the right compensation starts here.