In Re the Marriage of Doyle

Appellant, Janice Louise Doyle (Janice), appeals from the decision of the Twenty-first Judicial District Court denying her motion to set aside the property settlement agreement she entered into with Michael Joseph Doyle (Michael). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for rehearing.

We restate the issues as follows:

1) Did the District Court err in denying J anice’s motion to set aside the parties’ 1993 Property Settlement Agreement because the motion was not filed within 60 days of the final Decree?

2) Did the District Court err by awarding attorney fees without first conducting a…