Opinion ID: 1191948
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: replacement of the children's assets

Text: Roseman contends that the issue of the division of property and the absence of a legal obligation to pay for the children's college education was determined in the original proceeding, and, therefore, he cannot be required to make an additional contributionreplacing the value of the children's savings bonds-under the principle of res judicata. He also argues that the savings bonds, purchased by his parents for the purpose of funding the children's post-high school education, cannot be considered child support, and, therefore, the district court has no continuing jurisdiction based on child support or maintenance. If the district court's jurisdiction is based on a property division, Roseman asserts that the authority to divide property is limited to a division between the parties, and the conveyance of one parent's property to the children outside of child support obligations is precluded. `A divorce decree is a final judgment and res judicata on all issues decided.' Harshfield v. Harshfield, 842 P.2d 535, 537 (Wyo.1992) ( quoting Matter of Paternity of JRW, 814 P.2d 1256, 1265 (Wyo.1991) and citing Warren v. Hart, 747 P.2d 511, 512 (Wyo.1987); Mentock v. Mentock, 638 P.2d 156, 158 (Wyo.1981); and Heyl v. Heyl, 518 P.2d 28, 30 (Wyo.1974)). However, [w]here res judicata bars reopening a divorce decree, a district court retains jurisdiction to modify the decree under particular circumstances. Harshfield, 842 P.2d at 537; see also Barnett, 704 P.2d at 1309. In very limited situations a property division may be reopened and modified or vacated contrary to the bar of res judicata. Subject to specific time limitations, W.R.C.P. 60(b) and W.S. 1-16-401, et seq. authorize district courts to modify or vacate a judgment for fraud, mistake, inadvertence or irregularity. Harshfield, 842 P.2d at 538. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-16-401 (Michie 1997) provides, in pertinent part: (a) A district court may vacate or modify its own judgment or order after the term at which it was made:    (iii) For mistake, neglect or omission of the clerk or irregularity in obtaining a judgment or order[.] Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-16-408 (Michie 1997) requires [p]roceedings for the causes mentioned in W.S. 1-16-401(a)(iii) and (vi) shall be commenced within three (3) years    after the defendant has notice of the judgment. We also have recognized that a district court has inherent equitable powers to modify a final judgment, based on mistake or fraud, without regard to statutory time limits. Harshfield, 842 P.2d at 538; see also Barnett, 704 P.2d at 1310; Matter of Kimball's Estate, 583 P.2d 1274, 1279 (Wyo. 1978); and Holmes v. Holmes, 66 Wyo. 317, 211 P.2d 946, 953 (1949). In Barnett, 704 P.2d at 1310, the petitioner was successful in having a divorce decree modified three years after entry of the divorce because the parties had mutually omitted a marital debt in the property division. We affirmed the district court's order approving the modification of the decree under its general equitable powers. In this case, both parties agree that a mistake was made in the original divorce decree when the district court ordered Roseman to maintain the then non-existent savings bonds. It is also uncontested that Roseman's mother was able to cash the savings bonds only because she received power of attorney over the children's assets from Roseman. Other established facts include the timing of Roseman's mother's actions after the district court issued its decision letter ordering Roseman to maintain the savings bonds-and that Roseman petitioned the district court to modify its order regarding the savings bonds within three years from the date of the initial order. See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-16-408. Given that Roseman testified the money [was] not an issue, and it is unquestionable that the maintenance of a fund for the children's education is in their best interests, we find no abuse of discretion in ordering Roseman to place the current value of the savings bonds in an account for the children and to maintain that account for their future welfare.