Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Marriage, Trust and Postnuptial Agreements

By Stephanie F. Lehman
October 30, 2008

Postnuptial agreements can provide solutions to complicated issues that may arise during the marriage. Consequently, there has been a reported increase in the number of postnuptial agreements being drafted by practitioners.

While postnuptial agreements are not enforceable in every state (Ohio, for example), some states place substantial limitations on the ability of a husband and wife to enter into these agreements. The following 11 states evaluate post-nuptial agreements under the same statute as pre-nuptial agreements: Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. The following 15 states impose greater restrictions on post-nuptial agreements than pre-nuptial agreements: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Wyoming and Puerto Rico. Other states impose myriad requirements on post-nuptial agreements for them to be enforceable. For example, couples in Minnesota may enter into a postnuptial agreement only if: 1) each spouse has a net worth of $1.2 million; and 2) the couple stays married for at least two years after the agreement is executed. Several states including New Jersey and Tennessee require that a post-nuptial agreement meet standards of substantive fairness both at the time it is signed and at the time it is ultimately enforced. With regard to post-nuptial agreements, California imposes a rebuttable presumption of coercion. (Citations to the relevant statutory and case law are available upon request to the editor.)

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.