In the Matter of Danielle Ross and Christopher Ross
2016 WL 4443367, 169 N.H. 299, 146 A.3d 1232 (2016)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A spouse's misconduct, such as adultery, that occurs after the filing of a divorce petition but before the issuance of a final decree can serve as a valid basis for the defense of recrimination. To obtain a fault-based divorce, a party must remain an "innocent party" up to the time the decree is granted.
Facts:
- Danielle Ross and Christopher Ross were married on July 27, 2002, and had two children.
- The couple separated in 2011.
- Christopher Ross alleged that Danielle Ross committed adultery during the marriage.
- Approximately eleven months after Danielle Ross filed for divorce, Christopher Ross began a sexual relationship with another woman while still legally married.
Procedural Posture:
- Danielle Ross (petitioner) filed for divorce in the New Hampshire Circuit Court, alleging both fault and irreconcilable differences.
- Christopher Ross (respondent) filed a cross-petition for divorce, alleging Danielle's adultery as a fault-based ground.
- Danielle Ross filed a motion to dismiss Christopher's fault-based claim, asserting the defense of recrimination based on his post-petition adultery.
- The trial court granted Danielle's motion to dismiss the fault-based claim.
- The trial court entered a final decree of divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences.
- Christopher Ross appealed the trial court's dismissal of his fault-based cross-petition to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a spouse's adulterous conduct, which occurs after a divorce petition has been filed but before a final decree is issued, constitute a valid basis for the defense of recrimination, thereby barring that spouse from obtaining a fault-based divorce?
Opinions:
Majority - Hicks, J.
Yes. A spouse's adulterous conduct that occurs after the filing of a divorce petition but before a final decree is issued can serve as a basis for the defense of recrimination. The controlling statute, RSA 458:7, requires that a fault-based divorce be decreed in favor of 'the innocent party,' which the court interprets to mean the party must be innocent at the time of the final decree. The statute makes no exception for misconduct that occurs post-petition. The court reasoned that recrimination is an application of the equitable 'clean hands' doctrine, meaning one who seeks relief from a court must be free from similar fault. Therefore, because Christopher Ross committed adultery while still legally married, he was no longer an 'innocent party' and was barred from obtaining a divorce based on his wife's alleged fault. The court also clarified that causation is not an element of the defense; the recriminatory act does not need to have caused the marital breakdown.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the temporal scope of the recrimination defense in New Hampshire, confirming that the requirement for a party to be 'innocent' extends throughout the entire divorce proceeding. It establishes that post-petition conduct can disqualify a party from obtaining a fault-based divorce, reinforcing the application of the 'clean hands' doctrine in domestic relations law. This ruling serves as a significant caution to divorce litigants, as their personal conduct during potentially lengthy legal proceedings can directly impact their ability to secure a fault-based judgment and any related advantages in property division or alimony.
