Decline to Sign or That Prenup is Valid, Honey
In DiPietro v. Vatsky, 177 A.D.3d 401 (2019), the Supreme Court of New York County held that Defendant husband’s efforts to meet his “very high burden” for challenging the parties’ prenuptial agreement failed. Both parties educated and savvy professionals were each represented by independent counsel, and entered into the prenuptial agreement after a period of negotiations several months before the marriage.
Plaintiff adequately disclosed her finances. In any event, plaintiff’s alleged failure to disclose does not provide a ground to set aside the prenuptial agreement, particularly, here, where defendant proceeded with prenup despite his claim that plaintiff withheld financial documents.
Prenup which included joint waivers of maintenance, the right to equitable distribution, and the right to election, was not so “manifestly unfair” as to warrant equity’s intervention. Defendant proceeded to execute the prenuptial agreement over his attorney’s objection. Thus, even if, in retrospect, a specific provision was one-sided, it does not provide a ground to vitiate the prenuptial agreement.DiPietro v. Vatsky, 177 A.D.3d 401 (2019)
