N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 52

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10

Contracts between husband and wife generally; releases

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 52 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Contracts between husband and wife not inconsistent with public policy are valid, and any persons of full age about to be married and married persons may, with or without a valuable consideration, release and quitclaim rights they might respectively acquire or may have acquired by marriage in the property of each other. These releases may be pleaded in bar of any action or proceeding for the recovery of the rights and estate released. No contract or release between husband and wife made during their marriage affects either of the following, unless it is in writing and is acknowledged by both parties before a certifying officer:

(1) Either spouse's real property.

(2) Income from either spouse's real property accruing more than three years after the execution of the contract or release.

(a1) A contract between a husband and wife made, with or without a valuable consideration, during a period of separation to waive, release, or establish rights and obligations to postseparation support, alimony, or spousal support is valid and not inconsistent with public policy. A provision waiving, releasing, or establishing rights and obligations to postseparation support, alimony, or spousal support remains valid following a period of reconciliation and subsequent separation, if the contract satisfies all of the following requirements:

(1) The contract is in writing.

(2) The provision waiving the rights or obligations is clearly stated in the contract.

(3) The contract was acknowledged by both parties before a certifying officer.

A release made pursuant to this subsection may be pleaded in bar of any action or proceeding for the recovery of the rights released.

(b) A certifying officer under this section shall be a notary public, or a justice, judge, magistrate, clerk, assistant clerk, or deputy clerk of the General Court of Justice, or the equivalent or corresponding officers of the state, territory, or foreign country where the acknowledgment is made. The officer shall not be a party to the contract.

(c) This section does not apply to any judgment of the superior court or other State court of competent jurisdiction that, by reason of its being consented to by a husband and wife, or their attorneys, may be construed to constitute a contract or release between the husband and wife.  (1871-2, c. 193, s. 28; Code, s. 1836; Rev., s. 2108; C.S., s. 2516; 1959, c. 879, s. 12; 1965, c. 878, s. 1; 1977, c. 375, s. 2; 2013-140, s. 1; 2025-25, s. 1(d).)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 92 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Harllee v. Harllee
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Harllee v. Harllee (2002) ncctapp · cites it 19× “2d 670, 673 (1974); see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (2001). Pursuant to N.”
State v. Stroud (2001) ncctapp · cites it 12× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 52-10 (1999) allows contracts between a husband and wife without restriction, other than being consistent with public policy.”
Williams v. Williams (1995) ncctapp · cites it 39× “1 *818 (1991), but rather a marital contract as provided in N.C.Gen.Stat. § 52-10 (1991) which by its terms was void as against public policy.”
Howell v. Landry (1989) ncctapp · cites it 12× “N.C.G.S. § 52-10 provides in pertinent part that: No contract or release between husband and wife made during their coverture shall be valid to affect or change any part of the real estate of either spouse, or the accruing income thereof for a longer time than three years next…”
Hagler v. Hagler (1987) nc · cites it 6× “N.C.G.S. § 52-10 (1984); Blount v. Blount, <a href="/opinion/1298166/blount-v-blount/" aria-description="Citation for case: Blount v.”
Sfreddo v. Hicks (2019) ncctapp · cites it 8× “%20%C2%A7%2052-10"> N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (b).”
Buffington v. Buffington (1984) ncctapp · cites it 8× “Antenuptial agreements regulating the parties’ property rights during marriage, on the *487 other hand, have long been permitted in our state, see N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (a) (1983 Cum.”
Raymond v. Raymond (2018) ncctapp · cites it 4× “%20%C2%A7%2052-10"> N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (b) (2015).”
Small v. Small (1989) ncctapp · cites it 6× “e of Property Rights Executed Prior to Adoption of Equitable Distribution Act Effective 1 October 1981, our Legislature enacted the Equitable Distribution Act (the “Act”) which provides in part that “before, during or after marriage the parties may by written agreement, duly…”
Matter of Estate of Tucci (1989) ncctapp · cites it 6× “G.S. 52-10.... Antenuptial contracts, when properly executed and acknowledged, are not against public policy and may act as a bar to the.”
Burgin v. Owen (2007) ncctapp · cites it 2×
Nunn v. Allen (2002) ncctapp · cites it 2× “See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (2002). Separation agreements are generally construed like any contract between two parties.”
Show all 92 citing cases →
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10(a) — 11 cases
Williams v. Williams (1995) ncctapp “1 *818 (1991), but rather a marital contract as provided in N.C.Gen.Stat. § 52-10 (1991) which by its terms was void as against public policy.”
Matter of Estate of Tucci (1989) ncctapp “G.S. 52-10.... Antenuptial contracts, when properly executed and acknowledged, are not against public policy and may act as a bar to the.”
Adams v. Adams (1988) ncctapp
Brawley v. Brawley (1987) ncctapp
McIntyre v. McIntyre (2008) ncctapp
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10(b) — 20 cases
Small v. Small (1989) ncctapp “e of Property Rights Executed Prior to Adoption of Equitable Distribution Act Effective 1 October 1981, our Legislature enacted the Equitable Distribution Act (the “Act”) which provides in part that “before, during or after marriage the parties may by written agreement, duly…”
In re Estate of Potts (2007) ncctapp
Sfreddo v. Hicks (2019) ncctapp “%20%C2%A7%2052-10"> N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10 (b).”
Johnson v. Johnson (2018) ncctapp
McLean v. McLean (1987) ncctapp
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10(c) — 1 case
Tevepaugh v. Tevepaugh (1999) ncctapp
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.