(a)Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to all of the following:
(1)The rights and obligations of each of the parties in any of the property of either or both of them whenever and wherever acquired or located.
(2)The right to buy, sell, use, transfer, exchange, abandon, lease, consume, expend, assign, create a security interest in, mortgage, encumber, dispose of, or otherwise manage and control property.
(3)The disposition of property upon separation, marital dissolution, death, or the occurrence or nonoccurrence of any other event.
(4)The making of a will, trust, or other arrangement to carry out the provisions of the agreement.
(5)The ownership rights in and disposition of the death benefit from a life insurance policy.
(6)The choice of law governing the
construction of the agreement.
(7)Any other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing a criminal penalty.
(b)The right of a child to support may not be adversely affected by a premarital agreement.
(c)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. An otherwise unenforceable provision in a premarital agreement regarding spousal support may not become enforceable solely because the party against whom enforcement is sought was represented by independent counsel.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
16
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2000–2024 · leading case:
Sturm v. Moyer, 243 Cal. Rptr. 3d 556 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
Sturm v. Moyer, 243 Cal. Rptr. 3d 556 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
· cites it 4× “6 The UPAA provides that the parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to various issues, including: "[t]he rights and obligations of each of the parties in any of the property [ 7 ] of either or both of them whenever and wherever acquired or located" ( Fam.…”
In Re Marriage of Bonds, 5 P.3d 815 (Cal. 2000).
“Such limitations are inconsistent with the freedom-of-contract analysis espoused, for example, by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.”
Zarubin v. Miotke (In re Miotke), 248 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
“Family Code section 1612, subdivision (c) provides, in relevant part, "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…”
Austin v. Austin, 819 N.E.2d 623 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004).
“, Cal. Family Code § 1612 (c) (West 2004); Ill.”
Muchmore v. Trask, 666 S.E.2d 667 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
“” Cal. Fam. Code § 1612 (a)(7) (2008) (continuing Cal.”
Sturm v. Moyer (Cal. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 4× “) 7 located” (Fam. Code, § 1612, subd. (a)(1)), and “[a]ny other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing a criminal penalty” (Fam.”
Marriage of Miotke (Cal. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 4× “13 Judge Towery reviewed Natalia’s brief at the start of the second day of trial, and immediately denied the request for spousal support, again reconfirming that Judge Gallagher upheld the PMA, thus resolving the issue of support based on the waiver 13 Family Code section 1612,…”
Marriage of Zucker (Cal. Ct. App. 2022).
“(Fam. Code, §§ 1612, 1615.) 3 A. Parties’ Backgrounds The parties had disparate economic backgrounds.”
Marriage of Zucker (Cal. Ct. App. 2022).
“(Fam. Code, §§ 1612, 1615.)3 A. Parties’ Backgrounds The parties had disparate economic backgrounds.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.