Catherine D. Gibbs v. James C. Gibbs ( 2000 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Elder, Bumgardner and Lemons
CATHERINE D. GIBBS
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 2161-99-4 PER CURIAM
MARCH 7, 2000
JAMES C. GIBBS
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY
Kathleen H. MacKay, Judge
(Judith M. Bragan, on brief), for appellant.
(Cary S. Greenberg, on brief), for appellee.
Catherine D. Gibbs (wife) appeals the decision of the circuit
court denying her motion to suspend the final decree of divorce
entered August 16, 1999. The decree affirmed, ratified, and
incorporated, but did not merge, a Marital Settlement Agreement
signed by wife and James C. Gibbs (husband), with the assistance
of their respective counsel, on August 13, 1999. On appeal, wife
contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her
motion because she presented evidence that she was not competent
at the time she signed the marital settlement agreement. Upon
reviewing the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude that
this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm
the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code
§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.
Wife contends that, because she took prescription sedatives
pursuant to a doctor's instructions beginning August 12, 1999,
she was not competent on August 13, 1999 to sign the marital
agreement. "Marital property settlements entered into by
competent parties upon valid consideration for lawful purposes
are favored in the law and such will be enforced unless their
illegality is clear and certain." Cooley v. Cooley, 220 Va.
749, 752, 263 S.E.2d 49, 52 (1980). As the party seeking to set
aside the decree, wife bore the burden to present sufficient
evidence to prove that she was incompetent at the time she
signed the agreement.
The record demonstrates that wife and husband appeared in
court on August 13, 1999. The trial court entered an order that
day setting out certain stipulations and agreements of the
parties. Later that day, counsel for both parties conducted
further negotiations on the proposed marital agreement,
culminating in a final agreement. The parties executed the
agreement that evening, initialing each page. Counsel also
endorsed without exception the proposed final decree, which was
entered on August 16, 1999.
During the September 10, 1999 hearing on wife's motion to
suspend entry of the final divorce decree, wife's new counsel
presented an affidavit from a psychiatrist indicating that he
- 2 -
prescribed a sedative for wife on August 12. 1 A letter to wife
from the psychiatrist attached to the affidavit indicated that
wife took the prescribed medication. Wife presented no other
evidence concerning her competency on August 13, 1999. Her
counsel acknowledged that there was no issue of fraud in
connection with the execution of the agreement.
The trial court ruled that wife failed to demonstrate that
she was incompetent to enter into the marital agreement on
August 13, 1999. The court further noted that the terms of the
agreement were not so unfavorable to wife that it demonstrated
she was incompetent.
Based upon our review of the record, we find neither clear
factual error nor abuse of discretion in the trial court's
decision. Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is
summarily affirmed.
Affirmed.
1
Husband objected to the admission of the affidavit into
evidence because he had no opportunity to cross-examine the
affiant.
- 3 -