fighting property division post divorce

[wldcherry1]

I know the TX divorce is legal.  The divorce decree on file is signed by the judge and both attorneys. However neither party signed the decree.  TX law does not allow for one party to be awarded the sole and seperate property of the other.

Does the fact that neither party signed the decree give them the ability to fight part of the property division?  Especially since the decree awards the sole and seperate property of one to the other and TX law does not allow this?

Thanks

[socrateaser]

>Does the fact that neither party signed the decree give them
>the ability to fight part of the property division? Especially since the >decree awards the sole and seperate property of one to the other and ?>TX law does not allow this?

In some jurisdictions, an attorney can bind his/her client to a settlement unless the client expressly withdraws this power beforehand. I don't know if TX is such a jurisdiction (e.g., GA is, CA is not).

If your judgment was reached by agreement  (aka consent judgment, agreed judgment, stipulated judgment), rather than by a trial on the merits, then it is final and unappealable, unless you can show that you were tricked into agreeing to it. On your facts presented, I don't see that you have any evidence to support this theory.

If the judgment was not agreed to by you, and TX is not a binding jurisdiction as above-described, or the case was not tried on the merits, then you could move the court to set the judgment aside, on grounds that it violates your right to due process, i.e., your right to a trial.

[socrateaser]

>Does the fact that neither party signed the decree give them
>the ability to fight part of the property division? Especially since the >decree awards the sole and seperate property of one to the other and ?>TX law does not allow this?

In some jurisdictions, an attorney can bind his/her client to a settlement unless the client expressly withdraws this power beforehand. I don't know if TX is such a jurisdiction (e.g., GA is, CA is not).

If your judgment was reached by agreement  (aka consent judgment, agreed judgment, stipulated judgment), rather than by a trial on the merits, then it is final and unappealable, unless you can show that you were tricked into agreeing to it. On your facts presented, I don't see that you have any evidence to support this theory.

If the judgment was not agreed to by you, and TX is not a binding jurisdiction as above-described, or the case was not tried on the merits, then you could move the court to set the judgment aside, on grounds that it violates your right to due process, i.e., your right to a trial.