Edwardson v. Edwardson
798 S.W.2d 941 (Kent. 1990)

Facts:

  • Appellant (wife) and appellee executed a prenup where appellant, upon divorce, would receive $75 per week along with medical insurance for life, or until remarriage.
  • After they divorced Appellant wanted to enforce the agreement.

History:
Enforcement was denied in the trial court and on affirmed on appeal. The courts relied upon the principles set forth in Stratton, a case from 1916 that prohibited these types of agreements.

  • The view was that such an agreement was destabilizing to the marital relationship and might promote or encourage marital breakup.

Issue:
Whether any antenuptial agreement which contemplates divorce and provides for the payment of maintenance and the disposition of property upon subsequent dissolution of the marriage is enforceable.

Holding:
Yes. Case reversed.

Reasoning:

  • The court noted that marriage today is a lot different than it was back in Stratton and it was therefore time to do away with such an outdated rule.
  • With that said, antenuptial agreements are enforceable, but subject to some limitations:
    • There must be full disclosure; and
    • The agreement must not be unconscionable.

Rule: Antenuptial agreements which affect disposition of property and maintenance are enforceable, provided there has been full disclosure, and subject to scrutiny for unconscionability at time enforcement is sought.