Doheny v. Kohler
A party has a right to seek to reopen a divorce judgment, even where judgment was based on the agreement of the parties. But, a motion based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect must be brought within one year.
Conrad v. Conrad
A party can reopen property division based on a stipulation of the parties where she never agreed on the record, and the order was unclear.
In re Marriage of Tozer v. Tozer
Trial court’s refusal to grant relief from judgment will not be reversed unless the court abused its discretion or no reasonable basis exists for the court’s decision.
State ex. rel. M.L.B. v. D.G.H
Extraordinary circumstances may warrant a reopening of a judgment.
Thorpe v. Thorpe
Although property division cannot be modified under §767.32, §806.07 does give the court discretionary authority to grant relief from judgment.
Marriage of Mathewson v. Mathewson
Simple legal error, correctable by appeal, is not an extraordinary circumstance justifying relief from judgment.
In Re Marriage of Nehls v. Nehls
Husband entitled to blood tests to determine paternity after the divorce where he did not contest paternity at trial, but learned later that he may not be father.
In Re Marriage of Johnson v. Johnson
Trial court’s holding that it was required to reopen the judgment once it found fraud was error. A finding that there are grounds to reopen the judgment does not necessitate reopening it. The court may consider factors that would militate against granting relief.
In Re Paternity of L.S.G.
No abuse of discretion by trial court In Refusing to reopen judgment where respondent admitted paternity without blood tests and now claims he is not the father.
Marriage of Spankowski v. Spankowski
Discharge of a property settlement in bankruptcy does not warrant relief under §806.07.