Opinion ID: 2316989
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Bifurcation and Final Judgment

Text: In light of the tortured travel of this proceeding, we take this opportunity to comment on the manner in which this divorce was granted. There is no provision in the Rules of Procedure for a bifurcated divorce. Although an appeal from the decision pending entry of final judgment does not stay the final decree of divorce, our jurisprudence anticipates that all the issues in a divorce will be adjudicated in a single proceeding. Any exceptions to this requirement must be accomplished through Rule 54(b) of the Family Court Rules of Procedure for Domestic Relations that provides for the entry of judgment upon some, but not all, claims for relief: Judgment  Costs.    (b) Judgment Upon Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Parties. When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer that all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties. (Emphases added.) Compliance with Rule 54 is mandatory  a final judgment must resolve all the issues pending before the trial court or the court must direct a judgment in accordance with Rule 54(b). We contrast this case, in which a final decree of divorce purportedly was entered without adjudication of the remaining issues, from a case in which an appeal is taken from a decision pending entry of final judgment. In the latter case, a party to a divorce may appeal an interlocutory decision or a decision pending entry of final judgment. The divorce is not stayed pending an appeal on issues other than the divorce itself. Koziol v. Koziol, 720 A.2d 230, 232 (R.I.1998). In that situation, a Family Court justice may enter a final divorce decree even though other portions of the decision, such as equitable distribution or alimony contained in the decision pending entry of final judgment, remain on appeal. Id. (citing Centazzo v. Centazzo, 556 A.2d 560, 563 (R.I.1989)). Critically, in this circumstance all the claims have been adjudicated and are contained within the decision pending entry of final judgment. The law does not require that a final decree of divorce be stayed until all appeals are resolved. Id. That does not mean, however, that a final decree of divorce can be entered without a decision by the trial justice on the remaining issues. Nor may the parties agree otherwise. Thus, in the absence of a Rule 54(b) determination of no just reason for delay and an express direction for the entry of judgment by the trial court, a so-called bifurcated proceeding does not result in a final decree of divorce; the case remains pending until all the issues have been decided. Unless the court directs the entry of a Rule 54(b) judgment, the designation of a decree as a final judgment is a nullity; the divorce is not final, the case is not disposed and remains pending in the Family Court. There is no other procedural vehicle by which the parties can obtain a quickie divorce and leave the remaining, contentious issues for another day. Rule 1.17 of the Family Court Rules of Practice provides: Interchangeability of terms-Final decree-Final judgment-Interlocutory decree-Interlocutory judgment.  In actions granting a divorce an interlocutory judgment may be denominated `Interlocutory Decree' and a final judgment may be denominated Final Decree.' In all other instances, the term `Judgment' shall be used to denominate the document which evidences the act of the court finally adjudicating the rights of parties to the action.  (Emphasis added.) This rule of practice is consistent with Rule 54(b) and anticipates that a final judgment adjudicates all of the claims between the parties. See DiBattista v. State, 808 A.2d 1081, 1087 n. 5 (R.I.2002) (Rule 54 provides that a judgment includes a decree and any order from which an appeal lies.). In the case at bar, the trial justice failed to appreciate that the so-called final judgment that ostensibly granted an absolute divorce in April 2003 was not a final judgment. After this Court remanded the case for the entry of final judgment, the trial justice declared: How many [final judgments] are there? Well if there are two, tell me why the Supreme Court[,] after you went up there[,] came back and said enter a final judgment? When counsel for Joanne attempted to explain (correctly) that in a bifurcated proceeding, a final judgment was required on all the issues, the trial justice responded, Well, it's no wonder these people are broke after that logic. This confusion was compounded by the entry of a document entitled Amended Judgment that was nothing more than a narration of the proceedings and a recitation of the various rulings made during the course of this seemingly interminable venture. This was a contested divorce trial, not a series of motions and orders, and a final judgment should have been entered in accordance with the rules. This Court previously has declared that the practice of bifurcated divorce actions should not be undertaken when the parties have not complied with discovery. Koutroumanos, 865 A.2d at 1094 n. 2. We now unequivocally declare that (except in extraordinary cases and then only with respect to issues of child support, custody, visitation and relocation) all the issues between the parties shall be adjudicated in a single proceeding. The decision shall be embodied in a decision pending entry of final judgment, followed by a final judgment entered in accordance with the Rules of Procedure. Whenever fewer than all issues are decided, the trial justice shall set forth on the record his or her reasons for adjudicating fewer than all the claims between the parties and direct the entry of judgment in accordance with Rule 54(b). Finally, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances accompanied by specific findings of the trial justice, this Court will not entertain an appeal from a so-called bifurcated divorce proceeding.