Sean Thomas Ryan v. Dee Anna Ryan

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the statutory proscription on the modification or revocation of property settlement agreements is unambiguous
• noting that “a court’s exercise of power under Trial Rule 60(B) is subject to the limitations of the substantive law” and that provisions of the Indiana Code limit a court’s power to modify a marital settlement agreement
• observing that a Trial Rule 60 motions seeking relief from a property settlement agreement should be viewed as a contract claim and that “[i]f there is a mutual mistake, contract law provides the rules for resolving it”
• “We think it unlikely that a court can invoke equity to overcome the mandate of a statute . . . .”
• A court must approach a property-division dispute as a contract dispute, subject to the rules of contract law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).