Sailer v. Sailer - 2009 ND 73, 764 N.W.2d 445

Rule:

A premarital agreement becomes effective upon marriage, but several other parts of The Uniform Premarital Agreement Act affect the enforceability of a premarital agreement. N.D. Cent. Code § 14-03.1-06(1)(a) provides a premarital agreement is not enforceable if the party against whom enforcement is sought proves the prenuptial agreement was not executed voluntarily.

Facts:

Curtis Sailer and Sandra Sailer met in 1989. They both signed a prenuptial agreement on May 13, 1993. The parties married on May 29, 1993 and resided near Hazen, North Dakota. Sandra Sailer had one child prior to their marriage, and the parties had three children during the marriage. In October 2006, Sandra Sailer took the parties' minor children, left the family home, and relocated to Bismarck, North Dakota. Curtis Sailer filed for divorce on November 13, 2006, and Sandra Sailer answered. An interim order hearing was held on December 29, 2006, and on January 9, 2007, the trial court entered an interim order awarding Curtis Sailer temporary legal and physical custody of the parties' minor children. Trial was held on December 20-21, 2007. The district court entered a judgment on March 18, 2008. The district court deemed the prenuptial agreement conscionable as a matter of law and held the agreement was not so one-sided as to be unenforceable. The district court found Curtis Sailer did not waive the express provision of the prenuptial agreement by supporting his family with his income. The district court awarded Curtis Sailer physical custody of the children and both parties legal custody of their children. Sandra Sailer appealed. On appeal, Sandra Sailer asserted the trial court erred by enforcing the prenuptial agreement. Sandra Sailer asserted the prenuptial agreement should not be enforced because she did not voluntarily enter the prenuptial agreement; Curtis Sailer knowingly waived his right to enforce the prenuptial agreement; enforcement of the prenuptial agreement will likely cause her to seek public assistance; and if the prenuptial agreement is enforced, its substantive effect is unconscionable.

Issue:

Was the prenuptial agreement enforceable?

Answer:

Yes

Conclusion:

The court found no undue pressure other than Sandra Sailer’s desire to marry and to have Curtis Sailer trust her. Sandra Sailer failed to prove that the prenuptial agreement was not executed voluntarily, under N.D. Cent. Code § 14-03.1-06(1)(a). Curtis Sailer did not waive the express provisions of the agreement by voluntarily using his separate income to provide for Sandra Sailer and their children. N.D. Cent. Code § 14-03.1-06(2) did not preclude enforcement of the prenuptial agreement because Sandra Sailer failed to show her qualification for public assistance. The trial court failed, however, to make findings on the parties assets, resources, and foreseeable needs for the purpose of determining whether enforcement of the agreement was unconscionable, under N.D. Cent. Code § 14-03.1-07. The trial court's decision to award physical custody of the children to Curtis Sailer, under the best interest factors set forth under N.D. Cent. Code § 14-09-06.2(1), was not clearly erroneous.