Marriage Of Rudder And Rudder

217 P.3d 183 (2009)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

H and W began cohabitating in 1986 and were married on August 12, 1989. The parties executed a premarital agreement on August 10, 1989, the day before they were scheduled to fly to Las Vegas for their wedding. H testified that he had contacted the attorney who had handled his earlier divorce, to draft the agreement, and that, two weeks before the wedding, a draft of that agreement had been made available to W. W never indicated that she needed more time to consult with an attorney about it, and she had a 'very clear picture' of his business affairs and assets. W testified that she had seen the agreement for the first time the day that she had signed it; that she had asked H, when he announced that he was going to have the attorney prepare the agreement, to 'make sure that Nick Nylander [W's attorney] is there'; that Nylander had not been present when she arrived at the office to sign the agreement the day before they were to leave for their wedding; and that, when she asked H where Nylander was and expressed doubts about signing the agreement without having him present, H had responded, 'Go ahead and sign it. His attorney can take care of this for both of us.' W testified that she had then 'read through it again, and I just knew I was giving up my house and giving everything up. And I just knew it wasn't right.' When she said again, 'I think I should call [Nylander],' she testified that H 'just kept saying, 'The wedding's on. You've told everyone you're getting married. We're leaving tomorrow morning. Go ahead and just sign it. The wedding is on.'' The trial court adopted W's version of events. Both had been married previously; W has one child from her previous marriage, and H has two children from his previous marriage. They have no joint children. In 2006, H petitioned for dissolution of the marriage. At the time of the dissolution judgment, H was 55 years old and W was 49. H earns approximately $5,648 per month as an electrician. W is a licensed cosmetologist. W suffers from debilitating migraines and, at the time of the dissolution, she reported zero income. Before they were married, they entered into a premarital agreement, under which they each purported to waive any present or future interest in the separate real and personal property of the other and any claim to spousal support. The trial court ruled that the premarital agreement was unenforceable. The court also concluded that property and any appreciation in property acquired during the period of the parties' cohabitation--from 1986 to 1989--was to be considered a marital asset. The court awarded W temporary spousal support of $ 1,000 per month for 60 months. Both parties appealed. H contends that the court erred in failing to enforce the prenuptial agreement, or that the court erred in determining that 1986--the date of cohabitation--rather than 1989--the date of the marriage--was the relevant date for determining whether an asset was a marital asset for the purpose of dividing the parties' property. W contends that the court erred in failing to award her indefinite spousal support.