.webp)
.png)
One of the more important procedural facts in Maryland law has to do with the difficulty associated with modifying final judgments after a certain period of time. Within 30 days after a final judgment has been rendered, parties can file a motion to revise that judgment. This means, in practice, that courts can freely alter a final judgment during this 30 day timeframe, and the moving party isn’t required to meet a high standard for initiating the motion. After that 30 day period, parties can file an appeal, but they cannot move the court to freely alter a final judgment unless there is a showing of fraud, mistake or irregularity within the judgment itself. In other words, after this 30 day period, Maryland holds to a principle which gives deference to the “finality” of judgments; this principle is, in part, a pragmatic tool to ensure that courts aren’t required to revisit judgments long after the judgments were promulgated.
Maryland courts narrowly interpret the concepts of fraud, mistake and irregularity as part of the deference given to final judgments. Every now and then, cases which turn up which attempt to revise or modify an order after the 30 day time period. This recently happened in the case of Smith v. Smith (2025). Let’s examine this case in detail.
Factual Posture of the Case
This case was factually and procedurally complex. One of the things which added to the complexity of this case was the fact that it involved calculation of spousal benefits from a military retirement account, and the fact that the military service member was partly active duty and partly reservist.
Basically, in 1999 a court issued a final divorce judgment which included an order (“CPO”) for the military service member to share a certain amount of his retirement pay with his ex-spouse. Much later, in 2020, the parties were back in court because, at least initially, the wife complained that the husband was failing to give her the share of the retirement pay as ordered by the 1999 judgment. Ultimately, the husband actually initiated a motion to revise the 1999 order because of a supposed calculation error (with respect to the wife’s share of the retirement pay). The husband contended that the calculation had been erroneous back in 1999, and that consequently the wife would receive an improperly large share of his account.
The husband was actually successful at the trial court level, but then the wife appealed. On appeal, she raised the “finality of the judgment” principle, arguing that the trial court had been in error by revising the 1999 order well after the initial 30 day period had expired.
Outcome & Post-Ruling Discussion
Again, factually, this case was complex, and so a full treatment of the outcome would involve going over the arguments raised with respect to the calculation procedure utilized throughout the entire course of litigation. For the purposes of this article and what we want to convey, we can say that the wife was successful in raising her argument regarding the principle of finality of judgment. The appellate court concurred that the time for the husband to raise his particular issue had long expired, and that revising the 1999 order in the manner requested by the husband would be in conflict with Maryland’s principle regarding the finality of judgments.
This is a valuable point for Marylanders to take away: when it comes to issues which aren’t ordinarily modifiable, the principle regarding the finality of judgments is highly significant and may be invoked when the 30 day deadline expires. Certain issues, such as child support amounts or alimony, may be modified after this deadline depending on the advent of certain conditions; in those cases, a motion to modify may be brought later. But, for issues outside this scope, the principle of finality of judgments may be a useful tool to bar attempts to make changes at a later date.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Information
For additional information on divorce judgment revisions, modifications, or any other aspect of the divorce process in Maryland, contact one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
