Va. Code » Title 20. Domestic Relations » Chapter 8. Premarital Agreement Act
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 20-150 (2026)

Content of agreement

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to:

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. Spousal support;

5. The making of a will, trust, or other arrangement to carry out the provisions of the agreement;

6. The ownership rights in and disposition of the death benefit from a life insurance policy;

7. The choice of law governing the construction of the agreement; and

8. Any other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing a criminal penalty.

1985, c. 434; 1986, c. 201.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case: Pysell v. Keck, 559 S.E.2d 677 (Va. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pysell v. Keck, 559 S.E.2d 677 (Va. 2002). · cites it 24× “With regard to the content of a premarital agreement, Code § 20-150 provides that: Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to: 1.”
Shenk v. Shenk, 571 S.E.2d 896 (Va. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 6× “Code § 20-150. “Courts are not allowed to write new words into a statute plain on its face.”
Flanary v. Milton, 556 S.E.2d 767 (Va. 2002). · cites it 4× “*23 Code § 20-150 identifies the various subjects that such agreements may properly address, including the parties’ rights regarding spousal support and disposition of property upon separation or divorce.”
Plunkett v. Plunkett, 624 S.E.2d 39 (Va. 2006). · cites it 2× “" Code § 20-150(3)-(5). On appeal, the Court reviews a trial court's interpretation of a contract de novo.”
Dowling v. Rowan, 621 S.E.2d 397 (Va. 2005). · cites it 2× “ANALYSIS A. Property excluded from the augmented estate 1.”
Jodi Lynn Erpelding v. Timothy John Erpelding, 917 N.W.2d 235 (Iowa 2018). “2d 82 , 84, 87-88 (1991) (refusing to enforce premarital agreement, wherein wife waived her right to any and all property, because wife was receiving public assistance at the time of the divorce); Virginia, Va. Code Ann. § 20-150 (4) (West, Westlaw through 2017 Reg.”
Dove v. Dove, 680 S.E.2d 839 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× “§ 9-11-402); California (Cal. Fam.Code § 1611); Connecticut (Conn.”
In Re Marriage of Pendleton & Fireman, 5 P.3d 839 (Cal. 2000). · cites it 2× “§ 30-8-4 ); and Virginia (Va.Code Ann. § 20-150). An Indiana statute is similar to the Uniform Act.”
Gaffney v. Gaffney, 613 S.E.2d 471 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Code § 20-150 provides that parties may enter into such agreements with respect to “[t]he disposition of property upon separation [or] marital dissolution.”
Burke v. Burke, 662 S.E.2d 622 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Code § 20-150(8) allows divorcing parties to “contract with respect to” “[a]ny other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing criminal penalty.”
Black v. Edwards, 445 S.E.2d 107 (Va. 1994). · cites it 2× “) Code § 20-150 provides in pertinent part that parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to “[t]he disposition of property upon separation, marital dissolution, death” and the “making of a will .”
Rogers v. Yourshaw, 448 S.E.2d 884 (Va. Ct. App. 1994). “Code § 20-154 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: All written agreements entered into prior to the enactment of this chapter between prospective spouses for the purpose [of] affecting any of the subjects specified in § 20-150 shall be valid and enforceable if otherwise…”
Show all 33 citing cases →
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(1) — 2 cases
Shenk v. Shenk, 571 S.E.2d 896 (Va. Ct. App. 2002). “Code § 20-150. “Courts are not allowed to write new words into a statute plain on its face.”
Scott Anthony Oberlander v. Pamela Kaye Oberlander (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(3) — 5 cases
Pysell v. Keck, 559 S.E.2d 677 (Va. 2002). “With regard to the content of a premarital agreement, Code § 20-150 provides that: Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to: 1.”
Plunkett v. Plunkett, 624 S.E.2d 39 (Va. 2006). “" Code § 20-150(3)-(5). On appeal, the Court reviews a trial court's interpretation of a contract de novo.”
Shenk v. Shenk, 571 S.E.2d 896 (Va. Ct. App. 2002). “Code § 20-150. “Courts are not allowed to write new words into a statute plain on its face.”
Flanary v. Milton, 556 S.E.2d 767 (Va. 2002). “*23 Code § 20-150 identifies the various subjects that such agreements may properly address, including the parties’ rights regarding spousal support and disposition of property upon separation or divorce.”
Cox v. Mixon, 51 Va. Cir. 168 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2000).
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(4) — 2 cases
Anthony Cavallo v. Joanna Cavallo (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
Donovan v. Donovan, 51 Va. Cir. 34 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 1999).
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(5) — 1 case
Pysell v. Keck, 559 S.E.2d 677 (Va. 2002). “With regard to the content of a premarital agreement, Code § 20-150 provides that: Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to: 1.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(6) — 1 case
Cox v. Mixon, 51 Va. Cir. 168 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2000).
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-150(8) — 4 cases
Burke v. Burke, 662 S.E.2d 622 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). “Code § 20-150(8) allows divorcing parties to “contract with respect to” “[a]ny other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing criminal penalty.”
Linda S. Miller v. Chester E. Miller (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
Chester E. Miller v. Linda S. Miller (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
Benjamin J. Brown v. Stephanie N. Brown (Va. Ct. App. 2024).
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.