Stork v. First Nat'l Bank Ex Rel. Est. of Stork, 316 S.E.2d 400 (S.C. 1984). · Go Syfert
Search
Stork v. First Nat'l Bank Ex Rel. Est. of Stork, 316 S.E.2d 400 (S.C. 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events (14 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Slack v. Slack (visuper, 2015-04-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Slack v. Slack
visuper · 2015 · confidence medium
Ct. App. 2014); Johnson v. Johnson, 2011-Ohio-500 , P10 (Ohio Ct. App., Miami County Feb. 4, 2011); Stork v. First Nat’l Bank, 281 S.C. 515, 516 , 316 S.E.2d 400, 401 (1984); Bassler v. Bassler, 156 Vt. 353, 361 , 593 A.2d 82, 87 (1991); In re Marriage of Bernard, 165 Wn.2d 895, 902 , 204 P.3d 907, 911 (2009); and, In re Marriage of Matson, 107 Wn.2d 479, 482 , 730 P.2d 668, 670 (1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hudson v. Hudson
S.C. Ct. App. · 2014 · confidence medium
Such agreements “are not opposed to public policy but are highly beneficial to serving the best interest of the marriage relationship.” Stork v. First Nat’l Bank of S. C., 281 S.C. 515, 516 , 316 S.E.2d 400, 401 (1984).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Holler v. Holler
S.C. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
In Stork v. First Nat’l Bank of South Carolina, 281 S.C. 515, 516 , 316 S.E.2d 400, 401 (1984), this Court held that antenuptial agreements “will be enforced if made voluntarily and in good faith and if fair and equitable....
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hardee v. Hardee
S.C. · 2003 · confidence medium
In Stork v. First Nat’l Bank of South Carolina, 281 S.C. 515, 516 , 316 S.E.2d 400, 401 (1984), this Court held that antenuptial agreements “will be enforced if made voluntarily and in good faith and if fair and equitable....
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hardee v. Hardee
S.C. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Waiver of Alimony and Attorney Fees in the Premarital Agreement Husband argues the family court erred in finding the waivers of alimony and attorney fees were void and unconscionable. 3 We agree. 4 *93 South Carolina recognizes the validity of antenuptial agreements “if made voluntarily and in good faith and if fair and equitable.” Stork v. First Nat’l Bank of S.C., 281 S.C. 515, 516 , 316 S.E.2d 400, 401 (1984).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dorothy M. STORK, Appellant,
v.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SOUTH CAROLINA, as Executor of the Estate of Raymond M. Stork, Jr., Respondent
22111.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
May 22, 1984.
316 S.E.2d 400
1984 S.C. LEXIS 301
Brian L. Boger, Columbia, for appellant., Charles W. Knowlton and Daryl L. Williams, of Boyd, Knowlton, Tate & Finlay, Columbia, for respondent.
Littlejohn, Lewis, Ness, Gregory, Harwell.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published
Littlejohn, Justice:

Appellant, the widow of Raymond M. Stork, Jr., commenced this action against Respondent, the Executor of his Will, asking that the court grant her dower rights in the estate of her husband who died testate on May 12,1979. In its answer the Executor, in essence, alleges that the widow is barred from recovery (1) by reason of an antenuptial agreement and (2) because the right of dower heretofore existing in this State[*516] is unconstitutional as violative of the equal protection clauses of the United States and the State Constitutions. The trial judge granted the Executor’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the antenuptial agreement was binding and barred the widow’s claim. He declined to rule upon the constitutional issue finding it unnecessary to a determination of the case.

The widow has appealed alleging that there are genuine issues of material facts which should have been preserved for the jury. The Executor filed additional sustaining grounds submitting that the Order should be affirmed regardless of the antenuptial agreement because dower is unconstitutional and violative of the equal protection clauses of both constitutions. We affirm.

Antenuptial agreements, which usually involve the wife-to-be giving up her right to dower in consideration of marriage, will be enforced if made voluntarily and in good faith and if fair and equitable. Rieger v. Schaible, 81 Neb. 33, 115 N.W. 560 (1908) (citing Pierce v. Pierce, 71 N.Y. 154, 27 Am. Rep. 22). Such contracts are not opposed to public policy but are highly beneficial to serving the best interest of the marriage relationship. The trial judge found, and we agree, that the antenuptial agreement is enforceable. Summary judgment was properly granted.

Affirmed.

Lewis, C. J., and Ness, Gregory and Harwell, JJ., concur.