Zale issue

A Zale issue is when the Consent Decree reads differently than the intended parties’ agreement. In that case, the parties cannot use “extrinsic evidence” — i.e., evidence outside the Decree — to counter what the Decree reads. In Zale, there was a dispute about whether the parties intended spousal maintenance to end at a certain time or not. One of the party’s attorneys wanted to testify that the Decree did not reflect the parties’ agreement. The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the attorney could not testify to vary the terms of the Decree. Because once the Decree became a Court order and adopted by the Court, it reflect the intent of the Court, and the parties’ intent was no longer relevant.