John F. Daugharty and Sarah R. Daugharty - Page 16

                                                - 16 -                                                   

            filed November 4, 1986, the Fourth Judicial Circuit found, among                             
            other things, that:                                                                          

                        The plaintiff, Faye Eubanks Daugharty, has failed                                
                  to sustain the burden of proving by the greater weight                                 
                  of the evidence that:                                                                  
                        1.  there was any misconduct by attorney Paul                                    
                  Harden or collusion between Harden and her former                                      
                  attorney or her husband's attorney, Thomas Greene,                                     
                  which prevented her from presenting her case in the                                    
                  divorce action;                                                                        
                        2.  there was any conduct on the part of her                                     
                  former husband which prevented her from fairly                                         
                  presenting her claim or defenses in the divorce action;                                
                        3.  she was so afraid of her former husband that                                 
                  she was susceptible to the exercise of an undue                                        
                  influence over her and that she was unable to resist                                   
                  the husband's control of her mind and her will;                                        
                        4.  her former husband exercised any undue                                       
                  influence over her in any of the proceedings in the                                    
                  dissolution of marriage proceeding;                                                    
                        5.  she was prevented by any conduct of her former                               
                  husband or by the conduct of any attorney amounting to                                 
                  connivance that would defeat her claim or defenses;                                    
                        6.  she was uninformed as to the value of any of                                 
                  the property in the dissolution of marriage proceeding                                 
                  but, quite to the contrary, the evidence conclusively                                  
                  proved that she provided an itemized list of all of the                                
                  property owned by her former husband to her former                                     
                  lawyer, John Sulik, prior to any dissolution of                                        
                  marriage proceeding being instituted;                                                  
                        7.  there was any misconduct on the part of her                                  
                  dissolution attorney, Paul Harden * * *                                                

            The court denied Faye's request to set aside the Final Judgment                              
            of Dissolution of Marriage, which incorporated the Stipulation                               





Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011