Should Premarital Agreements Be Treated the Same as Contracts?

1281 Words5 Pages
Should Premarital Agreements be Treated the Same as Contracts? Contract law is relatively consistent regarding whether a contract was actually made and whether the parties involved can be legally held to the contract or not. This is primarily due to the fact that contract law proceeds from law handed down from centuries of civil and common law cases. Basically, two parties have to agree to the terms of the cited contract, after the offer is made and accepted (both parties have had time to review and make changes to the contract, although this process does not always occur), and they have either orally agreed or signed some form of written contract. It can be argued in a court afterword that there was not sufficient consideration or that one party coerced the other into an agreement, but these are usually handled at the signing of the contract. This process is time honored and, as said, has been in place for a long time. But, new types of contracts occur at times and they have a different sort of accounting by the courts. One of these types of contracts is that generally called prenuptial, antenuptial or premarital (Standler, 2009). This paper looks at prenuptial agreements and using the case of Simeone v. Simeone tries to determine some of the pros and cons of treating these agreements more like regular contracts. Simeone v. Simeone was a divorce court case brought by Catherine E Walsh Simeone against Frederick A. Simeone (Simeone v. Simeone, 1990). The issue was

More about Should Premarital Agreements Be Treated the Same as Contracts?

Open Document