James Hresko thought he could prove fraud in his divorce by his ex-wife Marie Heskro.  She told him she had no assets.  They settled their divorce with an agreement that gave her the option of buying him out of the house.  After an uncontested divorce, she exercised her option.  James thought she would have to get a mortgage to buy him out and he was stunned when she paid him $30,000 in cash.

James filed a motion to revise the judgment of divorce claiming that Marie had fraudulently concealed assets.

Thirty days after a divorce is entered in the court records by the clerk, it becomes final and unappealable.  In order to set it aside then, you must show that it was the product of fraud, mistake or irregularity.

But fraud comes in two varieties.  In Maryland, the type of fraud required to reopen a case must be extrinsic fraud and not fraud which is intrinsic to the trial itself.  Think you know how this case turns out?  Stay tuned for more discussion of extrinsic and intrinsic fraud.