Posted on 12/30/2004 8:52:27 AM PST by Radix
In a possibly precedent-setting case, the state Appeals Court has ruled that an ex-wife is entitled to alimony even though she signed a prenuptial agreement waiving it.
Donna Austin was 37, and Craig Austin was 35 when they were married in May 1989, each for the second time. Two days before the wedding, Craig Austin presented Donna with a prenuptial agreement, which she signed, according to her attorney, Dana Curhan.
The Appeals Court upheld the portion of the prenuptial that protected assets Craig Austin had acquired before the wedding. But it said Donna Austin's waiver of alimony was not reasonable at the time she and Craig Austin signed the document.
``It was unreasonable to expect that his spouse, who then had no assets and negligible earning capacity, would contribute to the marriage by raising his child and by supporting his ability to work outside the home, with no expectation of future support, no matter how long the marriage, and regardless whether she might never acquire assets of her own,'' Justice Fernande Duffly wrote in the court's opinion.
Craig Austin's attorney, Jacob Atwood, said he will appeal the decision. Atwood said Donna Austin benefitted greatly by receiving ``hundreds of thousands of dollars'' in the division of property assets at the end of the Sandwich couple's 12-year marriage.
``I think this decision flies in the teeth of the DeMatteo case,'' Atwood said, referring to a 2002 Supreme Judicial Court decision upholding prenuptial agreements except in cases where one of the marital parties was left with an extreme hardship.
But Donna Austin's attorney said, ``The court is saying that by waiving her right to alimony, she was essentially waiving her future rights, which was not a realistic thing to do.''
Oh. I get it now. You are responding to the article I posted. I agree with your comment on the quote from the article.
It is not victimology as much as the cash value of the marriage as one would cash out a life insurance policy.
The problem is that the marriage is usually valued by the value of the husband's earnings not the wife's. Much of this is the result of the fact that women USED to be the ones filing for divorce. (its a control thing)
Nowadays, you will find more men are willing to take control and file for divorce first. This often leaves the woman floundering on the control issue. (don't worry they recover quick)
I always thought that taking care of a home and raising children were work.
Considering I gave up a job as a software engineer to be a stay at home mom, I look at what I gave up for my family. I could easily be making over 100K right now. I didn't have to quit working. I made enough money to hire a nanny.
I won't be able to make as much money now that I haven't worked in 10 years, but that's okay. It's been worth it, but it is a job.
Maybe the wives are filing for divorces because the husbands are cheating on them.
Just because a woman files more often than a man means nothing.
Preposterous.
I'm not even going there.
Have a nice day.
It seems to be the case in family law. My ex got a parenting plan nullified because I couldn't produce the name of her divorce lawyer.
I don't "like" doing housework. I hated having children, especially hated having 3 miscarriages. If my husband could have had the children, I would have let him.
I gave up a job as a software engineer, so I gave up a lot of money to stay at home.
Just because a woman files more often than a man means nothing.
With all due respect, please go do more research before you spout foolishness like this again.
I'm seeing that in guys I know; I'm encouraging it. Unfortunately, a bogus domestic abuse claim tends to level the field pretty quickly.
Amazing. So a contract signed by a citizen over the age of 18 is no longer binding.
Gee, family court is getting speshaler and speshaler. Even the kangaroos have left.
Thank you!
All the literature I've seen suggests that while wives may be upset at affairs, they do not consider it generally to be cause for divorce.
Come on, it's always the man's fault!
Gee, family court is getting speshaler and speshaler. Even the kangaroos have left.
Come on...I know you know how it works when it comes to men and women and families.
Men have responsibilities.
Women have options.
The most common mistake in amature pre-nups is waiving child support or pre determining custody. Child support is not wavably by wither mother or father because it is owned by the child and custody is determined by the best interst standard superceeding the pre-nup.
Of course this assumes there is a dispute, if nobody fights only an astute judge will stop a settlement.
Yeah, when it comes to that argument, I've "been there, done that." It is a preposterous claim and I will not even respect it with an answer.
It was the stuff of some good movies though...
I don't have to do research. I know of lots of married men that I used to work with that had affairs with the young single women in my office.
Working men have much easier access to young women than a stay at home mom has to men. First, stay at home moms spend most of our time with children and in our homes. Right there means that we do not have access to men.
I take it that you have heard of it.
You just plug in some numbers and answer some questions and out comes the alimony. (aka Spousal Support, and/or Child Support)
There is a new one each year. Sweet! </sarcastic comment
My chances of getting a divorce is 0%. God is the third partner in our marriage and who we made our vows to. I'm not looking for anyone else and I know she isn't. I may sound naive to many people, but it's lasted over 20 years. You have to trust before you can love.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.