Background
Brandon Galarza petitioned for dissolution of marriage in 2019. After stating that he could not locate Marki Galarza, he obtained permission to serve her by publication. She did not appear, and the district court entered a default dissolution decree stating that there was no marital property to divide and that neither party sought spousal support.
Six years later, wife moved to vacate the decree, extend her deadline to respond, divide husband’s 401(k), and award her spousal support. She asserted that husband knew she was incarcerated and could have personally served her. She also sought sanctions, appointed counsel, and a child and family investigator (CFI). A magistrate denied the motions, and the district court upheld that ruling on review.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. Wife waived a personal-jurisdiction challenge based on allegedly insufficient service because she raised it years after the deadlines for asserting that defense. To the extent she invoked C.R.C.P. 60(b)(3), she did not adequately develop her claim that the decree or denial order was void.
In any event, the court held that the record supported service by publication. Husband had contacted wife’s relatives, tried to serve her at a scheduled criminal-court appearance and at a listed address, and searched county inmate locators. Those efforts supported the finding of due diligence and the resulting conclusion that the court had personal jurisdiction over wife. The court also rejected wife’s requests for a CFI and appointed counsel, explaining that the case did not involve parental responsibilities and that indigent spouses in civil dissolution proceedings have no right to court-appointed counsel.
Key Takeaways
- A challenge to personal jurisdiction based on deficient service may be waived if not timely asserted.
- A party seeking to vacate a judgment as void must adequately present and support that argument.
- Reasonable unsuccessful efforts to locate and personally serve a spouse can support service by publication in a dissolution case.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a long-delayed challenge to a default dissolution decree will not succeed merely because personal service may have been possible. A party must timely preserve service objections and meaningfully establish why the judgment is void.
It also confirms the limited role of CFIs and appointed counsel in Colorado dissolution litigation: a CFI is not required for a property-and-support dispute, and indigence alone does not entitle a spouse to counsel.