Marital Settlement Agreement • Enforcement • Standing • Third-Party Beneficiary

Weber v. Weber, PICS Case No. 17-1266 (Pa. Super. Aug. 11, 2017) Strassburger, J. (11 pages).

Trial court erred in finding that son lacked standing to enforce a provision of his parents' marital settlement agreement that provided for payment of college tuition because the trial court was wrong to raise the issue of standing sua sponte, the son had previously been granted permission to intervene in an action over the same provision and thus, had standing and son had standing as a third-party beneficiary of the agreement. Order vacated.

Divorced husband and wife entered into a comprehensive martial settlement agreement that provided that parents would share the cost of post-secondary education for the children and that husband had to notify wife before entering any transactions in regard to investments given to the children by their paternal grandfather and if husband failed to do so and the investments lost value, husband would pay that value towards the children's education before the calculation of the parties' equal share of the expenses. Wife filed a petition for special relief to enforce that provision and son filed a petition to intervene. The court granted the son's petition and wife filed a voluntary nonsuit. No other filings occurred for almost eight years until son filed a petition for special relief to enforce the provision. Husband raised affirmative defenses and the trial court dismissed son's petition for lack of standing. Son appealed.