Prenuptial agreements establish property rights and financial obligations between prospective spouses before marriage, while postnuptial agreements serve similar functions but are executed after the wedding has already occurred. The timing of execution creates significant legal differences—prenuptial agreements benefit from the parties’ arms-length negotiating position before marriage, whereas postnuptial agreements face heightened scrutiny because spouses already owe each other fiduciary duties of loyalty and fair dealing. Both types of agreements can override default state law provisions regarding property division, spousal support, and inheritance rights, but postnuptial agreements often face additional challenges in enforcement due to the existing marital relationship.

Marital agreements have earned judicial skepticism through a long history of abuse, particularly where economically powerful spouses have used them to strip dependent spouses of basic financial protections. Courts recognize the inherent inequality of bargaining power that often exists between parties to these agreements—one spouse may control most assets, have sophisticated business experience, or simply leverage the other’s emotional commitment to secure unfair terms. This skepticism translates into exacting judicial review that examines not just what the agreement says, but how it came to be signed: Was there full financial disclosure? Did both parties have adequate time to review the agreement? Did each understand what rights they were surrendering?

The involvement of independent attorneys for both parties dramatically increases the likelihood that a marital agreement will survive judicial scrutiny. An attorney ensures their client understands the default legal framework they’re modifying—many people don’t realize, for instance, that retirement accounts earned during marriage are typically marital property subject to division, or that inheritance rights exist beyond what a will provides. Legal counsel can explain how the agreement changes these baseline protections and what that means in practical terms for various scenarios like divorce after a long marriage, death, or disability. When both parties have attorneys, it becomes much harder for someone to later claim they didn’t understand what they signed or were pressured into unfair terms.

The procedural safeguards that make these agreements enforceable also require careful orchestration. Prenuptial agreements need sufficient lead time before the wedding and financial disclosure must be genuinely complete and comprehensible. Each party needs a meaningful opportunity to negotiate terms, even if they ultimately choose not to. Postnuptial agreements require even more careful handling, as courts suspect spouses may sign them under emotional pressure or without genuine bargaining. These procedural elements are best managed by attorneys who understand how courts evaluate the circumstances surrounding execution and can create a record demonstrating voluntary, informed consent—the foundation upon which enforceability rests.

Prenuptial Agreements and Postnuptial Agreements

Prenuptial agreements establish property rights and financial obligations between prospective spouses before marriage, while postnuptial agreements serve similar functions but are executed after the wedding has already occurred. The timing of execution creates significant legal differences—prenuptial agreements benefit from the parties’ arms-length negotiating position before marriage, whereas postnuptial agreements face heightened scrutiny because spouses already owe each other fiduciary duties of loyalty and fair dealing. Both types of agreements can override default state law provisions regarding property division, spousal support, and inheritance rights, but postnuptial agreements often face additional challenges in enforcement due to the existing marital relationship.

Marital agreements have earned judicial skepticism through a long history of abuse, particularly where economically powerful spouses have used them to strip dependent spouses of basic financial protections. Courts recognize the inherent inequality of bargaining power that often exists between parties to these agreements—one spouse may control most assets, have sophisticated business experience, or simply leverage the other’s emotional commitment to secure unfair terms. This skepticism translates into exacting judicial review that examines not just what the agreement says, but how it came to be signed: Was there full financial disclosure? Did both parties have adequate time to review the agreement? Did each understand what rights they were surrendering?

The involvement of independent attorneys for both parties dramatically increases the likelihood that a marital agreement will survive judicial scrutiny. An attorney ensures their client understands the default legal framework they’re modifying—many people don’t realize, for instance, that retirement accounts earned during marriage are typically marital property subject to division, or that inheritance rights exist beyond what a will provides. Legal counsel can explain how the agreement changes these baseline protections and what that means in practical terms for various scenarios like divorce after a long marriage, death, or disability. When both parties have attorneys, it becomes much harder for someone to later claim they didn’t understand what they signed or were pressured into unfair terms.

The procedural safeguards that make these agreements enforceable also require careful orchestration. Prenuptial agreements need sufficient lead time before the wedding and financial disclosure must be genuinely complete and comprehensible. Each party needs a meaningful opportunity to negotiate terms, even if they ultimately choose not to. Postnuptial agreements require even more careful handling, as courts suspect spouses may sign them under emotional pressure or without genuine bargaining. These procedural elements are best managed by attorneys who understand how courts evaluate the circumstances surrounding execution and can create a record demonstrating voluntary, informed consent—the foundation upon which enforceability rests.