PARKER vs. PARKER
Court have review Parker v. Parker, 916 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the First District Court of Appeal's decision in M.A.F. v. G.L.K., 573 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).1 The conflict issue is whether a wife's misrepresentation of paternity in a dissolution of marriage proceeding is extrinsic or intrinsic fraud. This differentiation is significant because of the one year limitation for filing a motion for relief from judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). As explained below, we agree with the Fourth District that this type of misconduct is intrinsic fraud and, therefore, relief from any judgment based upon such fraud must be sought within one year. Consequently, court approve the Fourth District's decision in Parker finding that the petitioner's motion is time barred, and court disapprove the First District's conflicting decision in M.A.F. Consistent with our resolution of this issue, court also reject the petitioner's alternative request that court reinstate his independent action against his former wife for damages based on this fraud.
Comments on PARKER vs. PARKER