Michael Bertin Analyzes PA Superior Court’s Strict Approach to Vacating Divorce Decrees

In his August 12, 2025, article for The Legal Intelligencer titled “Pennsylvania Superior Court Examines Motion to Vacate Divorce Decree,” Michael Bertin, partner and co-chair of the family law group, reviews the recent case of Maldonado v. Maldonado, ___ A.3d ___, Pa. Super. 132 (Pa. Super. June 27, 2025). The case addresses the uncommon situation of attempting to reopen a finalized divorce. Under Section 3332 of the Pennsylvania Divorce Code, a divorce decree may be opened within 30 days at the trial court’s discretion. After that period, a party must prove extrinsic fraud, lack of jurisdiction, or a fatal defect on the record.

“Section 3332 of the Pennsylvania Divorce Code governs motions to open or vacate divorce decrees.”

In Maldonado, the wife claimed she missed key court proceedings after her attorney withdrew, but the court found she failed to update her address as required by procedural rules. She filed to vacate the divorce 81 days after the decree was entered, but the court denied her request. The Superior Court upheld that decision, noting she did not allege fraud by the husband or meet the legal standards necessary under Section 3332. The court also emphasized that she failed to cite the law in her filings and did not meet her responsibility to keep her contact information current.

The decision in Maldonado highlights the finality of divorce decrees and the strict requirements for challenging them outside the 30-day window. It serves as a reminder to family law practitioners of the importance of procedural compliance, timely action, and maintaining clear communication with clients. The case also reinforces the obligation of self-represented parties to update their contact information, as failure to do so can lead to missed notices and lost legal opportunities.

Read the full article here.