Edwardson v. Edwardson
798 S.W.2d 941 (Kent. 1990)
- 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.
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.
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.
Yes. Case reversed.
- 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that marriage today is a lot different than it was back in Stratton and it was therefore time to do away with such an outdated rule.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.