The recent case of Miller v. Miller raises interesting issues for the family law practitioner. Generally, the Miller case pertains to a postnuptial agreement entered between the parties, which included a provision that the husband should pay for the mortgage, taxes and insurance on the marital residence until the marital residence was sold.
The facts of Miller are as follows: The parties married in 1979, had four children, resided in a jointly owned marital residence and divorced in 1994. The parties entered into a postnuptial agreement that was incorporated but not merged into the divorce decree, as noted in the opinion. Neither party disputes the validity of the postnuptial agreement. The agreement provided under paragraph 3.1 that the husband shall be solely responsible for payment of the mortgage, taxes and insurance on the marital residence and in the event the marital residence was sold, the parties would equally share in the expenses of the sale and net proceeds, and husband would be reimbursed for his payment toward the mortgage.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
