Cameron v. Cameron, 87-058

Decision Date10 May 1988
Docket NumberNo. 87-058,87-058
Citation150 Vt. 647,549 A.2d 1043
CourtVermont Supreme Court
PartiesEdward F. CAMERON v. Marjorie A. CAMERON.

Before ALLEN, C.J., and PECK, GIBSON and DOOLEY, JJ.

ENTRY ORDER

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Rutland Superior Court which granted his motion for rehearing and amendment of judgment but nevertheless awarded the marital property in a manner plaintiff contends to be an abuse of discretion. We affirm.

Plaintiff and defendant were granted a divorce by court order on October 16, 1986, with the decree to become absolute on December 9, 1986. Although plaintiff filed a motion requesting a rehearing, amended findings with regard to fault, and a corresponding adjustment of the property award, the court held no hearing, but corrected a mistake it had made with regard to the valuation and award of certain stock.

We note that the motion was ruled on after the nisi period had expired and the divorce decree became absolute. Ordinarily, the trial court's jurisdiction to amend the decree is limited to the nisi period. 15 V.S.A. § 554. See Downs v. Downs, 150 Vt. 647, 549 A.2d 1382 (1988). However, after the nisi period expires, a trial court's order may be changed pursuant to a 60(b) motion. Richwagen v. Richwagen, 149 Vt. 72, 75, 539 A.2d 540, 542 (1987).

V.R.C.P. 60(b)(1) allows the court to exercise its discretion to amend a final judgment or order to correct a mistake. See Darken v. Mooney, 144 Vt. 561, 566, 481 A.2d 407, 410 (1984). In this case the court did not abuse or withhold its discretion by amending the judgment and order to correct a mistake with regard to the valuation and award of certain stock.

AFFIRMED.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Milligan v. Milligan
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • May 15, 1992
    ...to file a motion in the trial court for relief from the judgment, as permitted by V.R.C.P. 60(b). See, e.g., Cameron v. Cameron, 150 Vt. 647, 648, 549 A.2d 1043, 1043-44 (1988); Blanchard v. Blanchard, 149 Vt. 534, 536-37, 546 A.2d 1370, 1372 Defendant next argues that the court improperly ......
  • Jones v. Murphy
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • March 2, 2001
    ...the parties may move to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to 60(b) of Vermont's Rules of Civil Procedure. Cameron v. Cameron, 150 Vt. 647, 648, 549 A.2d 1043, 1043-44 (1988) (mem.). Rule 60(b) allows a party to obtain relief from a final judgment for reasons of, inter alia, mistake, newl......
  • Slansky v. Slansky, 87-093
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • December 30, 1988
    ...court's order may be changed in response to a Rule 60(b) motion decided after the expiration of the nisi period. Cameron v. Cameron, 150 Vt. 647, 549 A.2d 1043 (1988); Richwagen v. Richwagen, 149 Vt. 72, 75, 539 A.2d 540, 542 Defendant's contention is that he was so heavily medicated on the......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT