In a Decision – Fou v Fou - (an "Unreported Decision") >>
the Court Held:
The record supports the trial court's finding that Plaintiff established exceptional circumstances for relief from the Marital Agreement. The judge noted that plaintiff had difficulty understanding the English language and did not comprehend the differences between the Chinese Agreements and the Marital Agreement which was incorporated into the judgment.
The court also noted that Plaintiff's attorney had been essentially retained by Defendant, and the retainer agreement that Plaintiff signed was invalid. Plaintiff did not have independent counsel. In addition, the court pointed out the critical differences between the Chinese Agreements and the Marital Agreement, which showed that Defendant had deceived and manipulated the divorce proceedings to Plaintiff's disadvantage.
Defendant Joe Zhuowu Fou and Plaintiff Janet Yijuan Fou were married in China. Upon their relocation to the United States, defendant earned a Ph.D. in atomic/molecular physics; Plaintiff, who had limited English-language skills, held a variety of low-skilled jobs. When they began discussing divorce, the parties executed agreements in their native Mandarin that provided that the property and assets of the family business, and all of the family and company's assets in China, would be divided equally between the parties at some future time. Plaintiff went to an attorney, who was selected for her by Defendant, who drafted a property settlement agreement in English. It made no mention of the property in China.
Plaintiff moved pursuant to Rule 4:50-1 for relief from the final judgment, claiming that the PSA differed substantially from the parties' prior Chinese agreements and that defendant had concealed assets in China to place them beyond her reach.
– The Appellate Court agreed –
The Appellate Court l found that Plaintiff had not had independent counsel and that Defendant had deceived and manipulated the divorce proceedings to Plaintiff's disadvantage.