Full question:
My friend and her husband entered a premarital agreement under which, it was stated: “ in case of divorce, her husband will pay her maintenance of $1000 per month as he was earning gross salary of $4000.” But actually his monthly income was $6000. Can my friend now demand higher maintenance?
- Category: Marriage
- Subcategory: Premarital Agreements
- Date:
- State: California
Answer:
Yes. In California, a premarital agreement cannot be enforced if a spouse is provided misleading information and on that basis the other spouse agreed to certain terms in the agreement. So, your friend may not be bound by the agreement she signed and may be entitled to higher maintenance if she proves the current agreement is not enforceable.The law is stated in Cal.Fam.Code § 1615 that reads:
“(a) A premarital agreement is not enforceable if the party against whom enforcement is sought proves either of the following:
(1) That party did not execute the agreement voluntarily.
(2) The agreement was unconscionable when it was executed and, before execution of the agreement, all of the following applied to that party:
(A) That party was not provided a fair, reasonable, and full disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party.
(B) That party did not voluntarily and expressly waive, in writing, any right to disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party beyond the disclosure provided.
(C) That party did not have, or reasonably could not have had, an adequate knowledge of the property or financial obligations of the other party.”
(1) That party did not execute the agreement voluntarily.
(2) The agreement was unconscionable when it was executed and, before execution of the agreement, all of the following applied to that party:
(A) That party was not provided a fair, reasonable, and full disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party.
(B) That party did not voluntarily and expressly waive, in writing, any right to disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party beyond the disclosure provided.
(C) That party did not have, or reasonably could not have had, an adequate knowledge of the property or financial obligations of the other party.”
This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Legal statutes mentioned reflect the law at the time the content was written and may no longer be current. Always verify the latest version of the law before relying on it.
