Shafmaster v. Shafmaster

Michele Shafmaster (plaintiff) and Jonathan Shafmaster (defendant) decided to divorce in a non-litigious manner. Jonathan’s accountant provided Michele’s financial advisor with a financial statement dated April 30, 1986. The parties negotiated a property-settlement agreement based on that financial information. Jonathan’s financial statement dated December 31, 1986, showed a significant increase in his assets. Neither Michele nor her financial advisor nor her lawyer knew about the new financial statement. In May 1987, Michele’s attorney requested that language be added to the stipulation stating that the parties acknowledged that they had been forthright regarding the status and value of their assets and financial affairs. Jonathan’s attorney refused to add the language and advised Michele’s attorney that Michele’s lawyer and financial advisor had been provided with all requested financial data and were responsible for determining the values for property-settlement purposes. The stipulation was signed without the language. The divorce decree incorporated the property-distribution stipulation, and the court approved the master’s recommendation of the divorce decree. Michele petitioned the court to modify the property settlement in the divorce decree, claiming that the stipulated property settlement was obtained by fraud through Jonathan’s intentional misrepresentation of material financial information. Jonathan maintained that the asset values contained in his financial statements were opinions rather than facts and could not be the basis for fraud. The trial court approved the master’s recommendation that Michele’s petition be denied. Michele appealed.