The plaintiff won in the lower court and was awarded attorney’s fees. The plaintiff disagreed and sought to enforce the MSA. After signing the MSA, the defendant in Stein determined that his retirement account should have been considered a premarital asset, not a marital asset, and should not have been included as part of the equitable property division. Stein focused mainly on two aspects of an MSA: the defendant’s agreement to roll over $100,000 of his retirement account into the plaintiff’s retirement account, and the parties’ agreement that whoever prevailed in an action to enforce the MSA would receive attorney’s fees for their trouble. Your MSA can override the normal principles of property division and other family law issuesĪ recent opinion from the Appellate Division shows how unwilling courts are to overturn these agreements. The threats could be financial (for example, if one spouse threatened to destroy the family business of the other spouse’s family if they refused to sign), but the bar is high, and the normal financial hurdles attendant to divorce are not, alone, sufficient. Instead, the party must show that they were truly coerced into signing by, for example, threats to themselves or their family. Duress does not simply mean that a party felt financial pressure to sign an agreement quickly all divorces raise significant financial issues. Likewise, if a party can show that they agreed to the MSA under “duress,” they may be able to challenge the contract. For example, if one party hid significant assets from their spouse throughout the marriage and during the divorce process, the other spouse may claim that they would not have agreed to the terms at hand if they had known about all of these other assets. If a party can show that their spouse made a material misrepresentation intentionally, which led to the first party agreeing to the MSA, the challenging party may be able to claim they were defrauded into signing. If one party can show that they entered into the MSA unwillingly, they may have grounds to challenge the MSA’s terms. Contracts are binding so long as they are entered into willingly and are not so unfair as to shock the conscience. An MSA may be overturned based on contract law principles such as fraud or duressĪn MSA is a contract. Read on for a discussion of how courts view marital settlement agreements and contact a seasoned New Jersey marital property attorney for help with a New Jersey family law matter. It is a binding contract between the parties, and absent a strong showing of some reason to disregard the contract, courts are loath to go against their terms. Once an MSA has been executed, however, it is meant to be final. It is preferable (and, indeed, cheaper and faster for everyone involved) for the parties to settle on their own rather than requiring a court to hold a trial on various issues. If you and your spouse can agree on all of the relevant terms, you can enter into a marital settlement agreement (MSA). Resolving all of the issues attendant to a divorce can be a difficult, draining, and time-consuming process. When Will a New Jersey Court Throw Out a Marital Settlement Agreement?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |