Once Bitten Twice Shy: Consider a Prenup as an Estate Planning Tool Before Saying I Do, Again
What many think is sufficient language in a prenuptial agreement to protect their estate, may not be. The best approach is to proactively and in-tandem incorporate estate planning language and instruments alongside a prenuptial agreement.
April 07, 2022 at 12:00 PM
9 minute read
Prenuptial agreements are not just for first-time newlyweds. With over 50% of Americans 55 and older remarried, there is significant value to a prenuptial agreement for those tying the knot a second time, especially if the remarriage includes children from a previous relationship. While generally we think of prenuptial agreements serving as protection against the possibility of a future divorce, they can also be a critical estate planning tool.
Traditionally, prenuptial agreements contain blanket provisions waiving the rights either party may have to the estate of the other, preserving the right to make provisions for the other spouse in a Last Will and Testament or to transfer assets at death outside of their will. A prenuptial agreement leaving all estate planning up to a subsequent will or the promise to transfer an asset outside of a will, can create a legal nightmare for a party who wants to provide for his or her new spouse and has children from a prior relationship. It may be the intention to leave certain property or assets to a spouse or to create a trust for a spouse's benefit, but if the prenuptial agreement only contains blanket waivers of estate rights and no further testamentary documents are executed, then those intentions are irrelevant. If the intention is to completely disinherit a new spouse, but the prenuptial agreement is silent on estate waivers, that intention is also rendered meaningless. The reality is what many think is sufficient language in a prenuptial agreement to protect their estate, may not be.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIdeas We Should Borrow: A Legislative Wishlist for NJ Trusts and Estates
14 minute readNew Methods for Clients and Families to Have Their Estate and Legacy Planning Complete
5 minute readFalling Back in Love With Certain Estate Planning Strategies in a Falling Interest Rate Environment
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250