Wilson, II v. Wilson (2022) & Abandoning Settlement Agreements

Published on
October 3, 2024
Written by
Angel Murphy, Esq
Category
Divorce

There are many ways to describe the divorce process. One way to describe this vast process is to say that divorce is something which generally unfolds in stages. How one stage is handled can affect the entire divorce process, and so each stage needs to be handled with exceptional care. At every step along the way, having counsel from an experienced attorney is always the preferred method.

In family cases, settlement negotiations are a way to basically remove the “trial stage” of a marital dissolution, or at least remove most issues from the trial stage. Certain things, such as child support, cannot really be “settled” privately by spouses because the state must play a role in how things are determined; but, for most issues, such as property division and custody, private settlement agreements can be a means to resolve a dissolution more rapidly.

Naturally, the settlement negotiation stage precedes the trial stage. What happens if a spouse abandons the terms of a settlement agreement and proceeds to trial, but then achieves less favorable results at trial than would have been included in the settlement agreement? This is essentially what occurred in the recent case of Wilson, II v. Wilson (2022). Let’s go over this case in detail.

Facts of the Case

The spouses in this case married in 2014, had a child in 2018 and then divorced in 2020. The spouses began negotiations to resolve all issues in a settlement agreement shortly after their separation. The spouses intended to include custody, visitation, alimony, and additional child support beyond the state guidelines. Ultimately, the settlement agreement was abandoned when the spouses couldn’t agree on child custody. The husband wanted an arrangement which would be labeled “joint custody,” as he didn’t want the wife to have an arrangement referred to as “primary physical” custody. This was the case even though the husband agreed to a visitation schedule which gave the wife physical custody for 4 days each week. No settlement agreement was ever signed, and then the case went to trial.

At trial, the husband ultimately ended up receiving less favorable terms than we would’ve received if the settlement agreement had been signed and implemented. The husband then tried to argue that the terms of the settlement agreement should be enforced, and the less favorable terms of the trial should be struck down. The husband’s argument was unsuccessful, and he subsequently appealed.

Ruling & Discussion

The appellate division ruled against the husband. This was a classic example of someone trying to rectify a mistake in an improper manner: when the husband figured the settlement terms were less favorable, he turned them down, but then when he realized he had made a mistake by going to trial he tried to recover them. Unfortunately for the husband, the law simply doesn’t work this way. When the husband turned down the settlement terms and proceeded to trial, the trial was conducted as though no settlement terms had ever been discussed at all. The husband couldn’t simply go back to the settlement terms when he failed to attain a better result at trial. This is precisely why parties need to think very carefully about whether they want to proceed to trial at all.

Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information

If you want more information on settlement agreements, the potential impact of abandoning settlement agreements, or another related matter, contact the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.

Angel Murphy

Personable. Passionate. Persistent.

Wilson v. Wilson | Maryland family law | settlement agreement | divorce process | Trial vs settlement | Custody dispute | Marital dissolution

Subscribe to our newsletter

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Articles & Resources