A stipulation was signed agreeing to pay back alimony, on a permanent alimony order, from personal funds several months prior to the appellate court's ruling to reverse the order and sent it back to the local court to submit a written statement of decision and allow the parties a chance to argue the decision. As it stands now, the temporary alimony is still in effect and the stipulation was based on permanent alimony is the stipulation still valid and is there a ruling or law that would apply to the stipulation either valid or invalid. The appellate court's ruling was 4 months after the signing of the stipulation. This whole thing is really a mess!!!
Thanks for any responses.

More information is needed. What was the appeal about and what if anything did the court say regarding the stipulation?

The stipulation was not part of the appeal it was signed while we were waiting for a decision from the appellate court.
Part of the appeal was that the commissioner based the permanent alimony on facts that were not true, he credited the spouse with income from son who should be paying rent. When the house had been sold and the son had not lived in the house prior to the house being sold. The commissioner was aware of the sale of the house because he divided the proceeds in the settlement. The alimony was based on overtime which was no longer available and substantiated with testimony from the supervisor. Many things like that.
The appellate court basically said the commissioner had not followed through with procedures and had not given either party a chance to file any disagreements with his decision. So the decision was reversed and remanded back to the court.
Hope this is enough. If not, let me know.

Is the stipulation valid, if it was signed without knowing the appellate court would reverse the courts decision? The respondents attorney pointed out that the temp. alimony is still in effect. But the stipulation was written for the permanent alimony arrears.

It appears that the parties agreed to a resolution of the issue, which they are free to do even with the case on appeal. Why didn't the attorney's advise the appellate court that the issue was resolved? Was there some other intent for the stipulation?

The back alimony was not part of the appeal. Several bases for the amount of the permanent alimony, the commissioner hearing the case, etc was the reason for the appeal. It was clear by some of his statements that he didn't know what was going on and he relied on the other attorney on how he should rule. The commissioner was fumbling and lost most of the time.

We are new to this legal system and all of the procedures. The counsel at that time was young and inexperienced. The signing of the stipulation was a matter of, he thought he had no choice, because the court had been bias before and to go through the system again was financially, not feasible. I guess you could say we have had to much faith in "if you tell the truth everything will be okay" and "the system is just". Didn't realize the system is manipulated and cases are won by the people who are out to win by any means possible and not looking for fairness.