Frenay v. Frenay

Superior Court of Guam·Decided February 10, 2023·No. DM0031-20·Unknown

Opinion

. Fl LE D sLlpEH-.toR COURT CT CZUAM

2023 FEB 10 PH 2: 55 cLEn1-1 UF COURT IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 51/c LYNDA FRENAY, Domestic Case No.DM0031-2d3Y=

plaining DECISION AND ORDER RE vs. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO ENFORCE AND FOR SU1V1MARY JUDGMENT PIERRE x. FRENAY,

Defendant.

In this divorce action, Defendant Pierre X. Frenay moves to enforce a Mediation

Settlement Term Sheet as a marital settlement agreement with Plaintiff Lynda Frenay. Upon

review of the record, evidence, and testimonies offered by the parties, the Court determines that

the parties entered into a binding agreement inclusive of spousal support. The Court therefore

GRANTS Pierre's motion.

1. DISCUSSION OF FACTS

On the eve of the parties' divorce trial, they made a final effortto mediate their dispute.

The mediation resulted in a "Mediation Settlement Term Sheet" signed by the parties, their

attorneys, and the mediator. Deal. Counsel, art. (Oct. 31, 2022) (referred to herein as "Term

Sheet"). Among other terns, the Term Sheet indicated:

• A mutual divorce based on irreconcilable differences,

• "Interlocutory and final decrees, pursuant to an Integrated Marital Settlement Agreement,"

• Lynda to receive the parties' two residences (and accompanying mortgages) in Hawaii, and Pierre to receive the residence in Guam,

• The parties to share equally in all bank accounts and Pierre's retirement account,

• Lynda to exclusively receive her full retirement account,

URIGINAL DM0031-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO ENFORCE Page 2 AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

• Pierre to provide Lynda with fifteen months of COBRA, valued at $10,000,

• Pierre to provide Lynda with moving expenses covered by Pierre's employer, valued at $25,000;

• Each side to pay their own fees and costs,

• "*Settlement Agreement, Interlocutory and Final Decrees, and Q DRO to be signed and submitted to Court before October 7, 2022, with exchange of deeds and transfer of cash assets, including possession of La Stella Maris, to occur not later than November 1, 2022.' , and,

• "*Balance StatementsNerification for cash accounts and retirement accounts to be provided and updated before October 7, 2022."

In support of the present motion, Pierre submitted a Schedule A, referenced in the Term

Sheet. Deal. Counsel, art. Part one of Schedule A listed thirteen cash, investment, and

retirement accounts and divided them as reflected in the Term Sheet. In total, in addition to the

real property distribution, Lynda would receive roughly $1.7 million in monetary assets, and

Pierre would receive $1.5 million. Part two of Schedule A listed a distribution of the parties'

home furnishings. Lynda, however, disputes that Schedule A as submitted was considered part

of the Term Sheet when she signed it, asserting that Pierre did not provide it until airer mediation

was completed. Test. Lynda Frenay at 10:13:11-20 (Dec. 20, 2022).

Since signing the Term Sheet, the parties have assumed control over the real properties as

expressed therein and in part two of Schedule A. Test. Lynda Frenay at 10:14:45-50. Lynda has

also moved to Hawaii and availed of the moving expenses under Pierre's fumier employer. Test.

Lynda Frenay at 10:14:51-58. However, Lynda, now self-represented, refuses to sign the deeds

to assume responsibility over the mortgages for the two Hawaii properties, meanwhile, Pierre

continues to pay the mortgage amounts. Test. Pierre Frenzy at 10:50:34-39 (Dec. 20, 2022).

Lynda claims that she cannot afford the mortgages without a provision for spousal support.in

addition to the sums she received under the Term Sheet. Submission are (Nov. 28, 2022).

I

ORIGINAL DM0031-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO ENFORCE Page 3 AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Pierre now asks the Court to enforce the Term Sheet and enter summary judgment. At

the hearing on the motion, Lynda and Pierre both testified. In summary, Lynda argues that she

did not have all relevant information before signing the Term Sheet, that Pierre omitted certain

information, and that account statements were not disclosed as agreed upon. She also seeks

clarification of certain terms and spousal support. In contrast, Pierre contends that all disclosures

were provided and that she is not entitled to spousal support. Decl. Dei 1[7 (Dec. 20, 2022). u 11. ANALYSIS

A. Summary Judgment and Enforcement of Settlement Agreements.

Under Guam law, a court may treat a motion to enforce a settlement agreement like a

motion for summary judgment using the standard under Guam Rule of Civil Procedure 56.

Sharrocku McCoy, 2016 Guam7 1] 109. According to that mle, a court may issue summary

judgment if there is no genuine issue of material fact that the parties entered into a binding

settlement agreement. GRCP 56(a). However, if there is a genuine issue of material fact, the

Court may review extrinsic evidence to resolve ambiguities and enforce a settlement agreement.

Shamrock, 2016 Guam 7 1]87, Wassonu Berg, 2007 Guam 16 1] 11.

B. The Term Sheet is a binding settlement agreement.

A mediation agreement is construed like a contract. Perez 14 Monkeypod Enters., 2022

Guam 121] 18. A valid contract must have an offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual

assent to the essential terms. Shamrock, 2016 Guam 7 1]95. "Under this approach, we 'discern

and give legal effect to the intent of the parties at the time of contracting' by 'generally, and

whenever possible' restricting our analysis to the plain meaning of the contract terms." Id., Leon

Guerrero u Moylan, 2000 Guam 28 118; 18 GCA § 87105. For this reason, in divining the

parties' intent, the Court focuses on the language within the four comers of the Term Sheet. See

18 GCA § 86107 ("The execution of a contract in writing ... supersedes all the negotiations or

URIGINAL DM0031-20 DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO ENFORCE Page 4 AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

stipulations concerning its matter which preceded or accompanied the execution of the

instrument."). "However, if the intent of the parties is not unambiguously expressed by the

language of the [contract], the district com may review extrinsic evidence and enter subsidiary

factual findings as to the parties' i ntent ...." S hamroc k , 2016 G u am 7 1[87 (citing T hatcher u

Kohls Dep T Stores, Inc., 397 F.3d 1370, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2005)).

O f i t s face, the Term Sheet conforms to all aspects of a binding marital settlement

agreement. The two pages of terms appear to address and divide all of the parties' assets. The

Term Sheet also addresses the basis for the divorce (irreconcilable differences) and indicates that

the parties will execute interlocutory and final divorce decrees along with an "Integrated Marital

Settlement Agreement." The signatures by all present--not just the parties, but their counsel and

the mediator--further bolster the position that Lynda and Pierre accepted and mutually assented

to the Term Sheet's essential terms involving their divorce.

However, Lynda insists that Pierre did not meet the October 7 deadline to provide bank

statements and verifications for cash and retirement accounts. Due to that alleged failure by

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Frenay v. Frenay, (superctguam 2023).

Frenay v. Frenay (Frenay v. Frenay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thatcher v. Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
397 F.3d 1370 (Federal Circuit, 2005)