Quinn v. Schipper

Daniel Quinn (plaintiff) and Suzanne Schipper (defendant) married in 1980 and separated in 1992. The couple divorced in Maryland, and the trial court in Maryland entered a final divorce decree. The agreement’s Paragraph 11 on the stock interest provided that Schipper would transfer her stock interest and Quinn would indemnify Schipper from any liability including federal and state taxation. In March 1994, Quinn requested that Schipper sign an addendum to the separation agreement. The addendum contradicted Paragraph 11, stating Schipper would pay money owed for federal and state income taxes and Schipper would agree to indemnify Quinn. Quinn did not deliver the original signed agreement to Schipper until March 29, 1994, after she agreed to sign the tax-liability addendum. The final divorce decree did not incorporate the addendum on tax liability. Quinn filed a complaint in Vermont family court seeking the enforcement of the addendum. The family court initially ruled the addendum was invalid because it was not presented to the Maryland divorce court. Quinn appealed, and the Vermont Supreme Court reversed, holding the agreement remained a separate, enforceable contract. The family court conducted another hearing on the tax-liability addendum. Schipper argued that she signed the addendum under duress and that she voided the addendum by not submitting it to the divorce court in Maryland. The family court concluded the addendum was invalid because it was induced by fraud and because the separation agreement controlled because it became effective after the addendum. Quinn appealed, arguing that the family court denied the Maryland divorce decree full faith and credit by refusing the addendum.