Weber v. Weber

589 N.W.2d 358 (1999)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

H and W were married on September 13, 1995. Twenty-seven days later, w retained an attorney to begin a divorce action. W signed a property settlement agreement at a meeting with H on October 12, 1995. H was not represented by counsel. W was represented by attorney Thomas Bair, who advised H he represented only W and H should retain his own attorney. H declined and signed the document after reviewing it. The property settlement agreement was accompanied by a quitclaim deed giving W ownership of a condominium worth about $70,000 and owned by H prior to the marriage. The property settlement agreement was filed in district court on October 16, 1995. On October 16, H retained an attorney and moved the district court to set aside the property settlement agreement, including the quitclaim deed executed in conjunction with it. The district court found H was able to act independently and freely to protect his own interests. The district court also found no mistake, fraud, or undue duress. H appealed from the district court's judgment. The case was remanded to the district court, saying its analysis and ruling were too narrow; it should have considered whether the property settlement agreement was unconscionable. The trial court found the agreement unconscionable and set it aside in its entirety. W appealed.