Cerniglia v. Cerniglia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that wife's allegations constituted intrinsic fraud and were thus subject to the one-year limitation for seeking relief from judgment under rule 1.540(b)
• holding that “allegations of coercion and duress . . . constitute intrinsic fraud and [a]re thus subject to the one-year limitation for seeking relief from the final judgment”
• holding that “allegations of coercion and duress . . . constitute intrinsic fraud and [a]re thus subject to the one-year limitation for seeking relief from the final judgment”
• holding that wife was precluded from alleging tort and breach of contract claims based on a release in the marital settlement agreement serving to bar all claims arising from the marriage
• holding that a court cannot “entertain evidence contrary to [a contract’s] plain meaning”
• holding amendments to rules of procedure do not apply retroactively unless specifically provided

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).