In re: Marriage of SiegelAnnotate this Case
Irwin and Linda divorced in 1987. They are now in their early 80’s. Their marital termination agreement, which merged into a judgment, required Irwin to establish a life insurance trust for Linda, subject to certain terms. In 2013, Linda filed a Request for Order to Disclose Insurance Information, asking for a court order requiring Irwin to provide “proof” that the insurance policy was in existence. Irwin filed a Responsive Declaration consenting to disclose information about his existing life insurance for Linda’s benefit, attached some documents, and did not appear at the hearing. At the hearing, the family court judge construed the Request for Order To Disclose Insurance Information as a motion to enforce the marital termination agreement, and issued an order after the hearing which, among other things, required Irwin to establish a $126,916.00 trust with Linda as beneficiary. The court of appeal reversed, holding that Irwin was denied due process because the trial court’s orders exceeded the relief requested by Linda in the Request for Orders, he had inadequate notice of the relief, and the family court impermissibly modified a judgment that was nonmodifiable on its terms.