SIMONE GRAVEL, A/K/A MARIE SIMONE ST. PIERRE GRAVEL, APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIAM W. BAILEY, AS ADMINISTRATOR CUM TESTAMENTO ANNEXO OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF SARTO GRAVEL, DECEASED, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Simone Gravel appealed a circuit court decision denying her request to set aside a 1960 divorce decree obtained by her deceased husband, Sarto Gravel, on grounds of fraud in the service of process. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's finding that Gravel failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that her husband knowingly misrepresented her address in his affidavit for service by publication.
The court affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that Simone Gravel did not meet her heavy burden of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence. Although a divorce decree may be set aside for fraud in the affidavit used for service by publication, the plaintiff must prove the affiant knew the correct address but stated it was unknown or gave a false address. The chancellor's determination that the burden was not sustained was supported by the record and not clearly erroneous.
“A divorce decree may be set aside on the ground of fraud if the evidence reveals that the affidavit upon which publication of process was had was false in that the affiant knew the address at which publication of notice would be received but instead of giving that address gave another address or stated that the address was unknown.”
Establishes the legal standard for setting aside a divorce decree based on fraudulent service by publication
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSarto Gravel obtained a divorce decree on November 17, 1960, after filing a complaint on August 30, 1960. In his affidavit for service by publication,…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Diligent Search And Inquiry cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff, Simone Gravel, filed a complaint in the Circuit Court in an attempt to set aside a divorce decree obtained by the decedent, Sarto Gravel, on the ground that the decree was obtained by fraud. The chancellor found that the proof of fraud was not clear and convincing and entered a final decree in favor of the defendant.
The deceased had filed a complaint for divorce against the defendant on August 30, 1960. The affidavit of the deceased for service by publication alleged that although diligent search and inquiry had been made his wife’s residence was unknown to him. Before the master, the deceased testified that he had separated from his wife on June 9, 1954, at which time the parties resided at 1474 Washington Avenue, Bronx, New York. The final decree of divorce was entered on November 17, 1960. Following the divorce, the deceased remarried.
During the proceedings below, the plaintiff testified that she and the deceased resided at 1474 Washington Avenue, Bronx, New York from 1938 until 1942. In 1942 they moved to 490 East 171st Street, Bronx, New York where they remained until the deceased left her on June 9, 1954. The plaintiff remained at this location until May, 1960, at which time she was informed that the building would be torn down. She testified that when she moved she placed a change of address with the local post office and was forwarded mail sent to her prior address for a period of a year or two. Depositions of neighbors were introduced which substantiated plaintiff’s testimony concerning her residence.
The record of a personal injury suit instituted by the deceased against World Wide Rent-A-Car, Inc. in 1959 was also introduced into evidence. This record showed that on December 7, 1959 the deceased in an answer to written interrogatories testified that his wife resided at 490 East 171st Street, Bronx, New York.
*669Plaintiff stated that she had not seen or heard from her husband since he left her in 1954. Sarto Gravel died in September, 1963. This action was instituted on July 8, 1964.
A divorce decree may be set aside on the ground of fraud if the evidence reveals that the affidavit upon which publication of process was had was false in that the affiant knew the address at which publication of notice would be received but instead of giving that address gave another address or stated that the address was unknown.1 However, the burden of proof was on the plaintiff to establish the charge of fraud by clear and convincing evidence especially where the party charged with the fraud is dead.2
The allegation of fraud is predicated upon the fact that the deceased’s affidavit executed on August 22, 1960 upon which publication of process was had was false in that the deceased stated that in spite of diligent search and inquiry his wife’s residence was unknown to him. The plaintiff attempted to prove that the deceased, in fact, knew her address to which had notice been sent she would have received it. However, the deceased had not seen or corresponded with the plaintiff for six years. The plaintiff testified that she remained at the last marital address until May, 1960, when she was informed that the building would be torn down.
Based on this evidence the chancellor determined that the plaintiff had not sustained her burden of proof.
While this court may have reached a different conclusion on the facts, we are unable to say that the chancellor’s decision is clearly erroneous. The plaintiff’s burden of proof was heavy and the chancellor’s determination that it was not sustained can be supported by the record.
Therefore, the decree appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
PEARSON, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mayo v. Mayo, 344 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…ceased, there must be clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner failed to make the required diligent search and inquiry essential to the validity of constructive service. McDaniel v. McElvy, 91 Fla. 770, 108 So. 820 (1926); Gravel v. Bailey, 187 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). From the testimony at the Rule 1.540 hearing, it is undisputed that the wife lived with her husband in Ft. Myers, Florida, from January 20, 1975, until their separation sometime in March of that year. Prior to this time the wife…
-
Lavonia Covin v. Est. OF Henry Covin, 507 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…iage, failed to make the required diligent search and inquiry essential to the validity of constructive service. We, therefore, will not disturb the trial court’s determination that the judgment of dissolution was properly entered. Gravel v. Bailey, 187 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). Affirmed.…
-
Esmond M. Baynes v. Baynes, 690 So. 2d 662 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…g short of perjurious and fraudulent. This court and others have said that a divorce decree may be set aside on the ground of fraud if the evidence reveals that the affidavit upon which publication of process was had was false. See Gravel v. Bailey, 187 So. 2d 667, 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Corrigan v. Corrigan, 184 So. 2d 664, 666 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966) (dissolution set aside where evidence established that husband committed fraud in sworn statement a predicate for procuring constructive service of process); Mart…
Authorities Cited
- Barnes v. Willis, 65 Fla. 363 (Fla. 1913)
- Grammer v. Grammer, 80 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 1955)
- Martz v. Riskamm, 144 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)
- Zack Parramore v. Parramore, 61 Fla. 701 (Fla. 1911)
- Russell v. Russell, 129 Fla. 866 (Fla. 1937)