Golder v. Golder

In 1979, Diane Golder (plaintiff) and James Golder (defendant) entered into a property settlement agreement, which was incorporated into their divorce decree. At the time of the agreement, the property that the Golders owned was worth approximately $353,600. The value that Diane received pursuant to the settlement agreement drafted by James’s attorney was approximately $13,500. Diane had agreed to this amount because James had misrepresented and concealed the property’s value. James had also told Diane that if she consulted with legal counsel then he would litigate custody over their daughter. A year later, Diane filed an action to be relieved from the agreement. The trial court found that James’s misrepresentation and concealment of the property’s value constituted extreme fraud. The trial court also found that James was guilty of overreaching (i.e., taking unfair advantage of Diane) by threatening to pursue custody litigation. Therefore, the trial court relieved Diane from the initial judgment concerning the property settlement agreement, redivided the property, and awarded Diane an additional $166,125. However, the trial court refused to grant Diane’s request for attorney’s fees and punitive damages. James appealed, arguing that the evidence presented did not support fraud and overreaching. Diane appealed the trial court’s decision not to award her attorney’s fees and punitive damages.