In the matter of Taylor v. Taylor, the Delaware Supreme Court examined the trial court's denial of Mr. Taylor's application to reopen an alimony order entered in default of any appearance by him. Mr. Taylor sought to reopen the matter claiming he did not receive notice of the petition. His request was initially denied by the Family Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court concluded when Ms. Taylor sought the alimony award she was "not candid with the court" in that she changed Mr. Taylor's address with the trial court from the "one where he expected to receive mail to one she knew to be outdated." The Supreme Court further concluded that had Ms. Taylor "been candid with the Family Court, there is no doubt that the default judgment would not have been entered against [Mr. Taylor]." As a result, the Supreme Court found that Ms. Taylor's actions in the matter constituted "other misconduct" justifying relief under Rule 60(b)(3).
The decision may be read in its entirety here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
