prenuptial agreement Archives - Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri

Roses, Chocolates, and Prenups

February 14, 2019/in Family Law /by Michael Lonich

About forty percent of all marriage proposals occur during the proposal season – the time between Thanksgiving and Valentine’s day – with Valentine’s day as one of the most popular days of the year. While Valentine’s day brings a romantic feeling full of roses and chocolates, February is also the beginning of another season: divorce season. February has the highest rate of divorce filings out of the year, and there is a dramatic increase in referrals for divorce lawyers the day after Valentine’s day. Valentine’s day can elicit strong emotions and the statistics show that people follow their passions this month either by beginning or ending a marriage.

Staying married is not always easy or simple. In the United States, the divorce rate is around 50% and is even higher for second and third marriages. There are many complex issues that arise during marriage that a couple must navigate, particularly surrounding finances. Money is often the number one cause of conflict in a marriage, and as many as thirty percent of couples that fight about money end up divorced.

Typically, a premarital agreement is intended to create conditions that will encourage the growth and health of a marriage. The traditional agreement tends to focus on property owned before marriage by the couple as well as property that may be earned during the marriage. Although it seems like a premarital agreement would be counter-intuitive to romance, discussion of these important financial issues can help a couple grow. It can benefit the confidence in a relationship for couples to openly discuss their concerns and to plan together for the future.

Because of the cost, a premarital agreement may not be for everyone. The traditional factors a couple should consider include the total amount of wealth they possess, and whether there is an un-equal amount of wealth between the couple. Additionally, premarital agreements are gaining popularity with young people who have pursued careers that may lead to a lucrative profession. Protecting their personal efforts is an increasing concern amongst people who might rather not have the state determine their financial future.

If you are feeling swept up by Valentine’s day romance and are planning to propose, considering a premarital agreement may be a great benefit to your future. For more information and advice, please contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.

Please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Billionaire’s divorcing wife wants at least $1 million per month

March 6, 2015/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

How difficult would it be to spend $1 million dollars per month? In divorce proceedings that initiated last July, the wife of hedge fund manager Ken Griffin says that is precisely the amount that she requires to maintain her standard of living.

What are some of these expenses? They include:

– $2,000 a month for stationary

– $6,800 a month for groceries

– $7,200 a month for restaurant meals

– $8,000 a month for gifts

– $60,000 a month for an office and professional staff

– $160,000 a month for hotels

– $300,000 a month for a private jet

She makes this claim despite the presence of a prenuptial agreement that she signed in 2004. Ms. Dias-Griffin is seeking to have the prenuptial agreement nullified on the basis of duress and coercion. Mr. Griffin argues that she was fully aware of what she signed. The terms of the prenup included that she received $25 million upon signing the document, $1 million every year thereafter and Ms. Griffin had the advice of independent counsel – namely three prominent law firms – when signing.

In papers filed in Illinois state court, Mr. Griffin claims he already paid Ms. Dias-Griffin some $37 million in payments under the premarital agreement, in addition to giving her a 50% stake in the couple’s $11 million Chicago home. Ms. Dias-Griffin claims that this would only leave her with 1% of Mr. Griffin’s net worth and should be voided since she signed it under duress.

“Anne failed in her initial effort to obtain these things from Ken in the name of maintaining the ‘status quo,’” the filing reads, according to CNBC. “Now she claims that these same expenses are in fact ‘child support.’”

If you don’t know who he is, Ken Griffin is one of the world’s wealthiest men. As the founder and CEO of Citadel, a global investment firm, Forbes estimated his net worth at a value of $5.5 billion in 2014. Mr. Griffin married Anne Dias-Griffin in July of 2004. Ms. Griffin is also a founder of the Chicago-based hedge fund firm Aragon Global Management. Together, they have three children each less than 10 years old.

Typical Components of a Prenuptial Agreement

A prenuptial agreement can be a powerful tool in limiting property rights and alimony. A properly drafted prenup may be impossible to set aside. While the requirements for properly drafted prenuptial agreements vary from state to state, some of the general requirements in California for a valid prenuptial agreement under the California Premarital Agreement Act are:

– They must be executed voluntarily;

– Each party had independent legal counsel (or properly waived that right);

– Had legal capacity to enter into the agreement;

– There was no fraud, duress, or undue influence;

– A seven day waiting period between being presented with the agreement and signing it;

– Any other factor a court deems as relevant.

These are not all of the requirements, and each of the above mentioned requirements have elements that must be met in-and-of themselves. The Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more about prenuptial or post-nuptial agreements, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information.

Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Cohabitation Agreements: A Beneficial Tool For Both Parties

July 8, 2013/in Family Law /by Gina Policastri

So your relationship is going well and you’ve decided to start living together. Before couples get married, many consider creating a pre-nuptial agreement. But you’re just moving in together, just testing the waters – no harm, no foul, right? Not necessarily.

Although it may seem like no legal consequences can arise from simply living together*, California recognizes a particularly pesky action: the Marvin claim. In 1976, the California Supreme Court held that express contracts between non-marital partners are enforceable.** In Marvin, Lee and Michelle lived together as an unmarried couple for seven years and Michelle claimed Lee promised to take care of her for the rest of her life. Although Michelle was ultimately unable to provide proof of an implied contract, the Court’s holding was clear: express contracts between unmarried couples are fair game and enforceable.

As a result, with the sharp increase in the number of cohabitating couples in the past decade, a cohabitation agreement is a highly useful tool for unmarried couples to consider – much like a prenuptial agreement is for married couples. Some factors, amongst many more, to keep in mind when drafting a cohabitation agreement include:

Everything must be voluntary: cohabitation agreements must be entered into freely and voluntarily – just like prenuptial agreements.
Put everything in one document: include an integration clause that provides that the document signed by you and your partner constitutes the entire agreement – that there are no other outside agreements or oral agreements to be taken into consideration.
Put everything in writing: have a clause that requires all amendments to be made in writing, preventing the possibility that one party will later argue that later oral or implied changes were made to the original agreement.

A cohabitation agreement can benefit both the Lee’s of the relationship – the wealthier partner who has financially more to lose, and the Michelle’s of the relationship – the “weaker” partner who relied upon a partner’s promise to her financial detriment. If you are interested in creating a cohabitation agreement or reviewing your current cohabitation agreement, please contact our California Certified Family Law Specialists (as certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization) at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri. Our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex Family Law matters and are more than happy to meet with you and offer you a free consultation.

Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*1 in 4 people living together believes they have the same legal protections as married couples (http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/mar/09/cohabitation-agreement-essential-non-married-couples).

**Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal. 3d 660 (1976)).

From Bonds to Zuckerberg: The Importance of a Prenup in the Silicon Valley

May 29, 2012/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Will Mark Zuckerberg join the list of billionaires who tied the knot without prenuptial agreements?

Mark Zuckerberg is making national headlines for his marriage that took place on May 19, 2012, just one day after the initial public offering of Facebook. The mystery remains: do Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan have a prenup? All are in agreement that Zuckerberg would be better off with a prenup. Chan reportedly asked Zuckerberg to sign a relationship agreement before she moved to California several years ago to be with him, which outlined, for example, how much time they should spend together. It would not be surprising if she brought up the subject of a prenup first. However, celebrities such as Paul McCartney, Katy Perry and Mel Gibson chose to forgo a prenup. It’s easy to get caught up in the romance of a marriage, but it’s important to mix in a little realism.

California is a community property state, meaning that assets are typically divided 50-50 upon divorce. If Zuckerberg and Chan signed a prenuptial agreement, they would have agreed exactly how to split assets, including his Facebook stock, if their marriage dissolved in the future. The resounding principle behind prenuptial agreements is spouses themselves can determine how their property will be classified; they can agree that what would generally be classified as community will be separate property of one or the other, and conversely, they can change separate property to community property.

The current trends toward delayed marriage, cohabitation, rising divorce and remarriage rates have combined to create a new awareness of the seriousness of the marital contract and the far-reaching consequences that contract, once made, can have on individual lives. Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri can assist you in understanding your legal rights, and help you protect your family.

The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more about prenuptial or antenuptial agreements, contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Every Marriage Needs a Prenup

February 22, 2012/in Family Law /by David Patton

While a prenuptial agreement may not be the most romantic gesture, every couple can benefit from creating one, even if at the time of marriage there are little assets. Assets may accumulate during the marriage and even young couples just starting their own careers should want to make sure that what they acquire during marriage is not left for a court to divide.

While prenups are often associated with divorce, discussing hypothetical scenarios can help to shed light on relationship expectations and help ensure decisions are made accordingly. Many people also do not realize that post-nuptial agreements are possible. The only catch is that they can be more difficult to procure and enforce as there are additional requirements. Waiting until the last minute to think about a prenuptial agreement can result in unnecessary pressure and force more couples into the more difficult post-nuptial route.

Of the many considerations in discussing a prenuptial agreement, none is more important than the fact that California is a community property state. This means that couples’ assets are typically divided 50/50 despite any special circumstances. Any couple that would prefer anything besides equal division needs a prenup to avoid it. Attorneys have compared prenups to life insurance policies, no one enjoys imagining the worst-case scenario but having a policy or prenup in place can make a significant life event less difficult.

The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more prenuptial or post-nuptial agreements, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Partnering Your Prenups and Estate Plans

February 9, 2012/in Estate Planning, Family Law /by Michael Lonich

Premarital, or prenuptial, agreements are usually associated with pre-marriage planning and divorce. However, they also provide several benefits for estate planning. Premarital agreements can protect one spouse from liability for the other spouse’s separate debts and help to implement other estate planning strategies. When premarital agreements and estate plans are considered in concert, couples can maximize financial planning and estate planning goals and avoid potentially triggering unintended tax consequences or inconsistent estate planning.

In California, a community property state, a surviving spouse has a 50% interest in all community property. This right supersedes the terms of a will but may be waived in a premarital agreement, which does not necessarily equate with disinheritance. Waiving community property rights allows spouses to specify the manner in which their assets will be distributed and helps to ensure that estate plans will be carried out as intended. This may be helpful, for example, in a family business setting. If one spouse runs a family business with his or her children, a waiver of community property rights will allow the business to pass more easily to the children without the other spouse acquiring an interest in the business, through divorce or inheritance.

There are several other scenarios in which a premarital agreement may affect an estate plan. Premarital transfers may trigger income and gift taxes; estate tax exemption opportunities for surviving spouses may be missed; and premarital agreements may not comport with estate plans for a family home. Premarital agreements often provide for the disposition of the family home or give the surviving spouse a right to continue living there. However, these provisions in a premarital agreement should be drafted such that they will not impede an estate plan’s ability to execute home-related strategies such as transferring the home to a qualified personal residence trust.

If you are interested in learning more about premarital agreements and estate plans, please contact the experienced family law and estate planning attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Court of Appeal Clarifies Seven-Day Waiting Period for Premarital Agreements

October 14, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

California Family Code §1615 outlines the factors a court will consider when deciding whether to enforce a premarital agreement. If the court finds that, among other reasons, the agreement was not executed voluntarily or if the agreement was unconscionable (a fancy word for unreasonable), it will void a premarital agreement.

Section 1615(c) states that a premarital agreement will not be deemed voluntary unless the court makes three findings; one of them being that the party against whom enforcement is sought had not less than seven calendar days between the time the party was first presented with the agreement and advised to obtain a lawyer and the time the agreement was signed. The question most recently before the First Appellate Court was whether section 1615(c)(2) applied to a party who was represented by an attorney from the outset.

In Marriage of Cadwell-Faso & Faso, 191 Cal. App. 4th 945 (2011), husband (H) and wife (W) married in 2006. H was a wealthy, retired businessperson and W owned and operated her own business. Prior to their marriage, H’s attorney drafted a premarital agreement and presented it to W and advised her to seek independent counsel. W was unhappy with the agreement and her attorney subsequently drafted four separate addenda to which H disagreed. W faxed a goodbye letter to H following their inability to come to an agreement. Following further discussion, W’s attorney drafted a fifth addendum and faxed it to H. Six days later, H and W signed the agreement and were married

Eighteen months later, H and W sought dissolution of marriage. H asked the court to void the fifth addendum because he did not have seven days between the time of representation and execution and the agreement was thus involuntary per §1615(c)(2). The trial court ruled in H’s favor, finding that the requirements of §1615(c) were mandatory and the addendum was thus invalid. W appealed and the appellate court reversed. In its decision, the court could not determine from the text of the statute alone whether the seven-day rule was confined to unrepresented parties. Therefore, the court looked to the legislative history of §1615 and found that the legislature was concerned with situations where one party was not represented by counsel, not where counsel has been present from the start. The appellate court thus held that both the premarital agreement and the addendum were enforceable against H where he was represented by counsel throughout the premarital agreement process.

The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling premarital agreements. If you are contemplating marriage, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, who can provide you with an in depth analysis of your issues. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Post-Nuptial Agreements and Spousal Support

July 7, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Spousal support and prenuptial agreements often make headlines in high profile divorces; however, the lesser known separation agreement (a type of post-nuptial agreement) can also pose difficult issues for divorced couples. In North Carolina, for example, NASCAR Chairman Brian France is fighting to rescind a separation agreement that calls for him to pay more than $40,000 a month in spousal and child support. [NASCAR Divorce Case Gets Messier]. These types of agreements involving spousal support are valid under California law.

Separation agreements—also referred to as property settlement agreements or marital settlement agreements— are often executed by spouses when their marriage breaks down. The parties are free to agree to a division of property rights and/or rights and duties of spousal and child support, and then have a court approve the agreement. There are, however, statutory limitations on agreements regarding spousal support that must be taken into consideration.

One of the primary obligations imposed by statute on married persons is the obligation of support. Spousal support provides one’s spouse with the necessities of life, measured by the lifestyle of the particular parties. This obligation of support has long been regarded as unalterable during marriage. California Family Code section 1620 explicitly states, “Except as otherwise provided by law, a husband and wife cannot, by a contract with each other, alter their legal relations, except as to property.” Therefore, spouses in an ongoing marriage may not enter into post-nuptial agreements waiving or limiting the right of either spouse to support the other in the event of separation.

Section 3580 of the California Family Code, however, creates an exception to this prohibition. A husband and wife may agree, in writing, to an immediate separation and may provide in the agreement for the support of either of them and of their children during the separation or upon the dissolution of their marriage. The important distinction is that this agreement can only be made when a couple is ready for an immediate separation. Absent an immediate intent to separate, a court will not uphold a post-nuptial agreement altering spousal support.

If you have a post-nuptial agreement in place, if you are contemplating having one put together, or if you have been asked to sign a post-nuptial agreement and you are concerned about how it may affect your rights, the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have substantial experience in handling post-nuptial agreements. Please call our office to schedule a free 1/2 hour consultation.

*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Spousal Support Waivers in Pre-Nuptial Agreements Given Further Protection

June 2, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

The California Appellate Court recently upheld a spousal support waiver in a pre-nuptial agreement despite the fact that, under current California Law, the provision should be struck down as invalid.

In the May 24th, 2011 appellate court decision of In re Marriage of Howell, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District enforced a future spousal support waiver of a pre-nuptial agreement signed in 1999; despite the fact that under California Family Code section 1612, the provision should have been invalidated. Family Code section 1612, which is part of the Uniform Pre-Marital Agreement Act, provides in subsection (c) that:

Any provision in a premarital agreement regarding spousal support, including, but not limited to, a waiver of it, is not enforceable if the party against whom enforcement of the spousal support provision is sought was not represented by independent counsel at the time the agreement containing the provision was signed, or if the provision regarding spousal support is unconscionable at the time of enforcement.

Mrs. Howell signed the pre-nuptial agreement, containing a waiver of future alimony, at her husband’s request. At the time, she could not afford to hire an attorney to review the agreement and her husband (then, fiancé) did not offer to pay the cost for her to consult with an attorney.

At the trial court level, the court invalidated the spousal support waiver finding that Family Code section 1612, enacted in 2002, did in fact apply retroactively to the agreement, fully executed in 2002. On appeal, the appellate court did a full analysis of whether the statute should be applied retroactively to a 1999 agreement. Finding that it constituted a “material change in the law” and that it was not intended to apply retroactively, the appellate court ruled that the trial court erred in retroactively applying the statute and upheld the validity of the spousal support waiver.

If you have a Pre-Nuptial Agreement in place, if you are contemplating having one put together, or if you have been asked to sign a pre-nuptial agreement and you are concerned about how the Howell decision and Family Code Section 1612 may affect your rights, the Certified Family Law Specialists at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have substantial experience in handling pre-nuptial agreements. Please call our office to schedule a free half hour consultation.

A Recent Study Indicates More Women are Seeking Prenuptial Agreements Before Tying the Knot

April 5, 2011/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

Prenuptial agreements are increasingly more common among women. This trend partially stems from the growing percentage of females in the modern workplace. Women today, more than before, are seeking to protect their separate property assets by ensuring a prenup is in place prior to marriage. In addition, couples are signing these documents in order to protect their pension and retirement accounts in the event of a later divorce.

A California prenuptial agreement is a contract executed between two prospective spouses, to be effective upon marriage. Generally, a prenuptial agreement addresses the parties’ present and future property rights, as well as other issues relating to the marital relationship. Certain issues may not be dealt with in a prenuptial agreement, such as child support or child custody. Other provisions may be invalidated if they are found to be contrary to public policy, such as “fault” or “penalty” provisions for infidelity or abuse. In addition, if you are considering waiving your spousal support rights in a prenuptial agreement, it is highly recommended that you retain your own attorney both to protect your legal rights and the enforceability of the agreement.

For more information on prenuptial agreements, please contact our family law attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Source:

San Francisco Chronicle

Posts

Roses, Chocolates, and Prenups

Billionaire’s divorcing wife wants at least $1 million per month

Cohabitation Agreements: A Beneficial Tool For Both Parties

From Bonds to Zuckerberg: The Importance of a Prenup in the Silicon Valley

Every Marriage Needs a Prenup

Partnering Your Prenups and Estate Plans

Court of Appeal Clarifies Seven-Day Waiting Period for Premarital Agreements

Post-Nuptial Agreements and Spousal Support

Spousal Support Waivers in Pre-Nuptial Agreements Given Further Protection

A Recent Study Indicates More Women are Seeking Prenuptial Agreements Before Tying the Knot

Free 30-Minute Family Law or Estate Planning Consultation

Contact Us