I am a lawyer and you’re wrong. The presumption is, as I said, that it is valid. The burden switches to the party objecting to its validity to rebut that presumption. - still a lawyer (a divorce one, in fact) |
A prenup signals you’re not marrying for love, anyway. |
That is not true. If someone is on a second marriage and they have kids you are coming into the relationship with other responsibilities.
A mature second marriage means everyone is working through this. Not talking a Kevin Costner who essentially treated his wife like they were not partners but you have to discuss finances and responsibilities for your kids. |
Sounds like she was prioritizing her kids with this choice. Good for her. |
She must be a DCUMer. She said “full stop”.😂 |
No one said it was asked about 4 days before the wedding. My guess is it had been discussed for awhile, proposals and drafts were sent back and forth and they couldn’t agree. What was four days before the wedding was her calling it off. |
That is suspicious given he is a “wealth” manager. I’d run from him too. |
Actually, she's trying to spin it her way, but the issue is that he didn't want to sign the prenup that contained her terms (e.g. he pays her alimony if they divorce). |
not if it is sprung on someone shortly before the wedding |
A prenup acknowledges that people change and their priorities change, just because you are madly in love with someone now doesn't mean you'll still be madly in love with them 20 years from now. |
They can plan two weddings but leave the prenup until the last minute? I’m guessing it said he had to pay her a lot of money when they divorced. |
AND, initially she said that she called off the wedding to spend more time with her [adult] daughters and to focus on them. There was nothing said about a pre-nup. Then when people started speculating online that SHE wouldn't sign a pre-nup, she came out and spun it her way - that he wouldn't sign. He's a money manager in NYC. I guarantee that he has more money than her. And she is completely insane - like should be sent to a mental hospital insane. |
Still wrong. The presumption is that contracts are valid. That presumption is rebuttable. Do you really think 100% of prenups signed shortly before a wedding are invalid. Luckily, the one with the legal knowledge here is the lawyer. 😉 |
A pre-nup is the pre-agreed division of assets upon a divorce, not a will. A pre-nup does not determine how your assets are distributed upon your death - that is a will. The ignorance on this thread regarding pre-nups astounding yet people are so quick to have strong opinions on the topic. |
Ironic- bc you’re wrong, too. Prenups can absolutely decide how assets go upon a death. Yes, you still should have a will but it is impt to know that some assets require a separate waiver to be filled out to fully waive the right to the asset. Example: Husband has a 401k and a pension that follow the rules of ERISA. He and wife signed a prenup saying wife waives his retirement. Under ERISA, he had to also get a waiver from her, so if he failed to do so, then she gets the money even if she was not named as a beneficiary of those acccounts. Otherwise, the prenup can definitely waive assets in a divorce AND death and almost always does. |