MEMORANDUM TO SENIOR PARTNER word
count:1250
FROM: 5888
DATE: November 14, 2014
RE: Prenuptial agreement for Professor
When advising the English professor (“Professor”) on his prenuptial
agreement (“Prenup”), the best practice will be to incorporate the four
major approaches to prenuptial agreements, and the strategy used In re
Marriage of Bonds, which will increase the chances of the Professor’s
Prenup being fully enforceable. Simeone, p. 120; Shanks, p. 124; American
Law Institute, Notes, p.129; UPMAA, Notes, p.129; and Problem, p.132. All
four methods of looking at Prenups and the Bonds strategy have similar
factors that should strengthen any document that the Professor and his
+ancée agree to.
First Approach- Simeone
The Simeone court updates the test from the Geyer case. Simeone, p.
124. In Geyer, there was a two part test looked for a reasonable provision
for the spouse and if the agreement was entered into after full and fair
disclosure. Ibid, p. 120. The court said Geyer departed to far from contract
law by allowing consideration of knowledge of contracting parties and
reasonableness of their bargain as factors. Ibid.
1
The Simeone court believed that traditional principals of contract law
provide remedies where contracts are procured by “fraud,
misrepresentation, and duress. “ Ibid. The court factored in that women
entering into marriage had “more equality, were income earners, and were
no longer the weaker party.” Ibid. The Simeone court updated rule holds
that, “absent fraud, misrepresentation, or duress, spouses should be bound
by the terms of the agreement.” Ibid, p. 121. Furthermore, “no weight is
given to reasonableness, good bargains, or if terms were read and fully
understood.” Ibid. The dissent in Simeone wrote “marriage is not a contract
for hire,” but the majority countered that to look at reasonableness would
mean the “functioning and reliability of prenuptial agreements would be
severely undermined,” and that marriages would not be entered into if
