Tag: void agreements

Heartbreak Postnuptial Agreement

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Lisa Marie Presley, daughter of rock legend Elvis Presley, is as happy as a ‘hound dog’. A judge in her divorce from Michael Lockwood recently ruled that her postnuptial agreement waiving alimony is valid.

postnuptial agreement

Are You Lonesome Tonight?

Although she is single, the daughter of music legend Elvis Presley is not without her riches. The family court ruling means she won’t have to pay her estranged husband spousal support, according to court papers obtained by TheWrap.

In an order handed down Aug. 17, a judge found that a 2007 post-nuptial agreement signed by Presley and Lockwood in which they waived spousal support in the event of a split, is valid.

The Wonder of Postnuptial Agreements

I’ve written about various marital agreements before. Postnups are written agreements signed after a couple gets married, or have entered a civil union, to settle the couple’s affairs and assets in the event of a separation or divorce.

Postnuptial agreements are enforceable in divorce cases. But, there are two separate grounds by which either spouse may challenge such an agreement and have it vacated or even modified.

First, a spouse may set aside or modify an agreement by establishing that it was reached under fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, misrepresentation, or overreaching.

The second ground to vacate a settlement agreement contains multiple elements. Initially, the challenging spouse must establish that the agreement makes an unfair or unreasonable provision for that spouse, given the circumstances of the parties.

To establish that an agreement is unreasonable, the challenging spouse must present evidence of the parties’ relative situations, including their respective ages, health, education, and financial status.

With this basic information, a family court judge may determine that the agreement, on its face, does not adequately provide for the challenging spouse and, consequently, is unreasonable.

In making this determination, the trial judge has to find that the agreement is “disproportionate to the means” of the defending spouse. This usually requires some evidence to establish a defending spouse’s financial means. Additional evidence may also be necessary.

Keep in mind that this standard for avoiding or modifying the agreement happens when a couple is not in the midst of litigation against each other. This does not govern marital settlement agreements entered into during the course of divorce litigation.

Return to Sender

According to the papers, the agreement was arrived at the year after Presley and Lockwood married, and before the couple’s twins were born.

The order purportedly said that the post-nuptial agreement stated that:

“in the event of a judgment of nullity, legal separation or dissolution of marriage, neither party shall be obligated to pay spousal support to the other.”

The court added that Lockwood didn’t read this because it didn’t interest him, but he signed documents containing that language, twice, initialing every page on the July 2007 copy, and his attorney “signed the November 2007 version.”

Viva las agreements. The Wrap article is here.

 

New Article: Ambiguous Divorce Agreements

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Seeing more emojis? Are you confused about their meaning? For some light reading this Memorial Day weekend, my new article dealing with legal ambiguity in divorce agreements, “If it looks like a duck: Emojis, Emoticons and Ambiguity,” in the Spring 2018 Florida Bar Commentator, is now available in print and to download. Here is the abstract:

What are Emojis?

Originating in Japan in 1998, emojis are small digital images used to express an idea or an emotion in electronic communications. The term emoji is Japanese for “picture character.” Picture (pronounced “eh”), and character (pronounced moh-jee).

Today, roughly 70 percent of the public uses some type of social media. Social media has changed many of the ways in which we communicate. For one thing, social media has increased our use of emojis.

One report found that more than 92 percent of people use emojis on social media.

Emojis have spread to the business world, where nearly half of workers add emojis to professional communications, and companies use them to increase sales and brand awareness. You can order your next Domino’s with the “Slice of Pizza” emoji.

Emojis have also spread to family law courts, as parents are frequently using texts, emails and social media in order to communicate their agreements and understandings about their kids.

Ambiguous Divorce Agreements

There are unique issues with emojis, rendering them hard to interpret. This is a subject I have written about frequently. For one thing, there’s no definitive source as to what emojis mean.

That unknown can make agreements between parents about custody, visitation, temporary support in emails, texts or on social media, ambiguous. Divorce agreements are interpreted like any other contract.

Basic interpretation begins with the plain language of the contract, because the contract language is the best evidence of intent.

Courts are not supposed to rewrite terms if they are clear and unambiguous. Anyone seeking to show a court any evidence outside a fully integrated contract, must first establish that a contract is ambiguous.

Emojis and Legal Ambiguity

A contract is ambiguous when its language is reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation. That’s where emojis come in, they can be very ambiguous. But why?

Emojis are also small, making them hard to read. Interpreting an emoji can depend on what kind of device they appear in. For example, a 24-inch computer monitor displays thing differently than a 4-inch phone screen.

Emojis don’t always mean the same thing universally, so there can be many different meanings depending on which country you are in. For example:

????

The “Folded Hands” emoji symbolize “please” and “thank you” in Asia. However, in the U.S. it means: “I’m praying,” and frequently, “high-five”!

????

The “Pile of Poo” emoji is a pun on the Japanese word for excrement (unko), which starts with the same “oon” sound as the word for “luck” and is complimentary in Japan. But, in the U.S. the emoji is used to express contempt. Strangely, Canadians use the emoji the most.

You can’t understand an emoji’s meaning just by looking at one. People use emojis in ways that have nothing to do with the physical objects they represent, or even what typographers intended.

There are regional, cultural and slang meanings to consider too. After all, emojis’ inherent ambiguity is one reason why they’re increasingly becoming evidence in court.

The Spring 2018 Family Law Commentator is available here.

 

Challenging Divorce Agreements

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

A recent case in Florida shows that if your prenuptial agreement, divorce agreement, or mediated marital settlement agreement is poorly written, and the terms are ambiguous, you could be back in court fighting over it – as one South Florida couple found.

Prenuptial Agreement Miami

Clear as Mud

After a hearing, a family trial court judge found that a divorce agreement was “clear and unambiguous” and entered a final judgment. On appeal, the appellate court found the same contract to be ambiguous and reversed and remanded to hold more evidentiary hearings.

The confusion? The parties’ mediated settlement agreement required dividing the Former Husband’s pension, which provided:

The wife is entitled to 50% of the marital portion of this plan through the entry of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The marital portion is defined as the amount from the date of the marriage through the date of the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage.

The wife contended that the entire pension is marital because the enhancement was purchased with marital funds; the former husband argued that the purpose of the Agreement provision was to divide the pension 50/50, except for the enhancement portion.

Legal Ambiguity

I recently wrote an article in the Florida Bar Commentator about legal ambiguity and emojis. Divorce contracts are construed in accordance with its terms, so that where the terms are clear and unambiguous, the parties’ intent must be gleaned from the four corners of the document.

When a term is ambiguous or unclear, the trial court may consider extrinsic evidence as well as the parties’ interpretation of the contract to explain or clarify the language.

Ultimately, the appellate court considers whether the contractual provision was actually ambiguous; if not, ‘the language itself is the best evidence of the parties’ intent, and its plain meaning controls.

Determining if a contract is ambiguous may require the court to consider reading the entire agreement to clarify what the parties meant by including the provision.

A provision is ambiguous if it is fairly susceptible to different constructions.

Emojis and Ambiguity

Originating in Japan in 1998, emojis are small digital images used to express an idea or an emotion in electronic communications. Emojis are increasingly becoming evidence in family court, because they create ambiguity in agreements.

Emojis are also small, making them hard to read. Interpreting an emoji can depend on what kind of device they appear in. For example, a 24-inch computer monitor displays thing differently than a 4-inch phone screen.

Emojis don’t always mean the same thing universally, so there can be many different meanings depending on which country you are in. As a result, state and federal courts around the country are increasingly having to interpret emoji meanings.

Back to the Pension

The retirement provision was found to be ambiguous because it was fairly susceptible to different constructions. If the parties intended to split the pension equally, they could easily have said that the pension would be divided 50/50.

Yet, the Agreement refers to the “marital portion” of the FRS plan, a wording that suggested that the parties contemplated that some portion of the plan was non-marital.

The court found that a possible reading of the provision is that the marital portion of the plan is only that portion attributable to the former husband’s time of service with BSO.

Because of the ambiguity, the appellate court remanded the case back to the trial court to hold more hearings.

The appellate case is here.

 

Voiding a Marital Settlement Agreement

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Empire star, Terrence Howard, claimed he was forced into signing his marital settlement agreement, and got a trial judge to throw it out. His wife, Michelle Ghent, appealed and the appeals court reversed! When can you get out of a marital settlement agreement?

Divorce Empire

The ruling by the California appeals court, which reinstated the marital settlement agreement, could allow Michelle Ghent to claim some of Howard’s lucrative earnings from the hit Fox television series “Empire.”

The marital settlement agreement called for Howard to pay Ghent monthly support of $5,800, and as much as $4 million a year, depending on his earnings, including potential income from his role in the Fox series “Empire”.

Terrence claimed that Michelle blackmailed him, and threatened to publicly release private recordings of a sensitive, intimate and sexual nature that would be embarrassing and could damage his career.

As a result, Terrence claims he agreed, under duress, to a marital settlement agreement that obligated him to pay spousal support far in excess of what he would otherwise have been required to pay based on the parties’ year–long marriage.

The trial court found that Terrence presented credible evidence that Terrence felt frightened and forced into signing the marital settlement agreement, which he would not have signed but for Michelle’s threatening and coercive behavior.

Michelle appealed.

Florida Marital Settlement Agreements

I’ve written about marital settlement agreements before. You can set aside an agreement in Florida in a similar way as in the Howard case, by establishing that it was reached under fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, misrepresentation, or overreaching.

There is another ground to vacate a marital settlement agreement in Florida, and it has a few elements. First, you have to show that the agreement makes unfair or unreasonable provision, given the circumstances of the parties.

Once you have shown the agreement is unreasonable, a presumption arises that there was either concealment by the defending spouse or a presumed lack of knowledge of the finances at the time the agreement was reached.

The burden then shifts to the spouse defending the agreement, who may rebut these presumptions.

The Empire Strikes Back

The appellate court in California deferred to the trial judge’s factual findings, but nevertheless conclude that the facts did not prove duress as a matter of law. The three-justice panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles ruled unanimously to reinstate the judgment.

The court found three reasons for reversing the trial judge. First, and importantly, Terrence failed to show that Michelle’s threats and coercion utterly destroyed his free will.

Second, Terrence and Michelle had a tumultuous relationship, which included such significant physical abuse by Terrence that Michelle had to obtain multiple protective orders against him.

Third, too much time elapsed between the threat and the contract’s signing. The threats made by Michelle were in September 2011, but he executed the final settlement agreement in September 2012, an agreement virtually identical to one he had signed four months before.

The California 2nd DCA opinion is available here.

 

Silicon Valley Prenups

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The billionaire founder of Farmville has found himself in Divorceville. If divorces are tough, Silicon Valley divorces – with sophisticated spouses, high value assets, and hard-to-value assets – can be tougher. There is a reason more people insist on prenuptial agreements.

What are Prenups

I’ve written about prenuptial agreements before. Prenuptial agreements, or “prenups,” are contracts entered into before marriage that outline the division of assets in case of divorce or death.

Prenups, and Post-nups (agreements entered after a marriage) resolve things like alimony, ownership of businesses, title of properties, and even each spouse’s financial responsibilities during the marriage. As the UK Guardian reports, in Silicon Valley, divorces and prenup agreements go hand in hand.

Voiding Prenuptial Agreements

Farmville founder Mark Pincus, who was an early investor in Facebook and Twitter, is worth around $1.28b. Mark is separated from his wife, Alison Gelb Pincus, the co-founder of home decor business One Kings Lane. She also may be trying to get out of her prenup.

The couple married in 2008, a year after his company grew into a $1b company. Mark has a prenup. Unfortunately for him, in filing for divorce, his wife Alison has asked the court to set aside the agreement. Why? Because the value of his company increased so much after the marriage.

Prenuptial agreements are often used in high tech industries, and in Silicon Valley in particular, to protect ideas and future income – not just current salaries and property. This makes perfect sense in an age when intellectual property is so highly valued.

Because of Florida’s policy of enforcing agreements, prenups can be difficult to void – but not impossible. Florida has both case law and a statute to help lawyers, judges and the parties determine if a prenuptial agreement, for example, is enforceable.

In Florida, to test the validity of a prenuptial agreement, courts must consider things such as fraud, duress, coercion, in addition to the unfairness of the agreement, and whether there was any financial disclosure.

The Farmville case is a tough one. The spouse challenging the agreement, Alison, is herself very well off. She is the co-founder of One King’s Lane, which she sold to Bed Bath and Beyond for $30m. She is not exactly a stay-at-home mother who cannot work or lacks assets of her own.

Difficult to Value Assets

In divorce, determining the value of certain assets – businesses, stock options and restricted stock – is more complicated than it seems. As the shareholders of Snap Inc. have learned, startups may see their values skyrocket for their IPO, but later fizzle once earning reports become public.

Generally, anything you own before marriage counts as your separate or non-marital property. However, asset or debts acquired after the marriage is generally considered as marital or community property. In the event of a divorce, the law requires it to be distributed equitably, which usually presumes and equal split between partners.

A couple of weeks ago, tech analysts were hailing the IPO of Snap Inc. as a triumph. But a day after Snap posted a $2.2bn loss and decelerating user growth in its first earnings report as a public company, the stock’s value crashed.

Messy divorces don’t come cheap. When Elon Musk divorced his first wife Justine the two sides racked up $4m in legal and accounting bills in two years – around $170,000 per month. A prenuptial agreement can limit the costs of a divorce.

The Guardian article is here.

 

Against All Odds: Voiding Prenups

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

What do prenups, and singer Phil Collins have in common? We will soon find out. Phil may be a witness in a divorce trial where Phil’s ex-wife is testing the validity of an agreement she signed with her new husband.

As the Miami Herald reports, the five-day trial on the validity of an agreement is scheduled to start April 24. The trial is a part of Phil Collins’ ex-wife, Orianne Mejjati’s, current divorce from Miami developer Charles Fouad Mejjati.

This part of the trial is designed only to validate, or declare null and void, a prenup or postnup agreement that Orianne and Charles signed in May 2015 – about the time Collins moved to be near Orianne.

Under the agreement in question, Orianne would be forced to turn over her $10 million Miami Beach mansion to Charles, in addition to giving him half the value of her property near Geneva, Switzerland. It has been on the market for $62 million.

Easy Lover: Prenups and Postnups

I’ve written about prenups and postnups in the past. Prenuptial agreements, or “prenups,” are contracts entered into before marriage that outline the division of assets in case of divorce or death. Postnuptial agreements are contracts entered into after the marriage.

Both prenups and postnups help try to resolve things like alimony, ownership of businesses, title of properties, and even each spouse’s financial responsibilities during the marriage.

True Colors: Voiding Agreements

Because of Florida’s policy of enforcing agreements, prenups and postnups can be difficult to void – but not impossible. Florida has both case law and a statute to help lawyers, judges and the parties determine if a prenuptial agreement, for example, is enforceable.

In Florida, to test the validity of a prenuptial agreement, courts must consider things such as fraud, duress, coercion, in addition to the unfairness of the agreement, and whether there was any financial disclosure.

Under Florida’s Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, a prenup may not be enforceable if a party can prove, in part, that it was not signed voluntarily; or was the product of fraud, duress, coercion, or overreaching; or it was unconscionable.

Some of these defenses may also require a party to show they were not given a fair and reasonable disclosure of property, and did not voluntarily and expressly waive that right, and did not have adequate knowledge of the property or financial obligations of the other party.

That’s Just the Way It Is

In Orianne’s case, she stands to lose a large portion of her fortune, so Phil Collins has been cooperating with the court system. He was grilled by lawyers for several hours in January on what he knew about Orianne’s mental state when she signed the post-nuptial agreement.

According to media reports, Orianne now believes her condition at the time she signed the agreement made her legally incompetent to sign anything and says she was ‘coerced’ and ‘bullied.’ Charles’ side claims Orianne was properly represented by a lawyer, and he has been playing hard ball.

‘The husband threatened that he would disclose and make public allegations about the wife,’ Orianne’s original divorce petition reads.

‘That would cause the wife great personal, professional and social embarrassment, humiliation and upset and would, the husband threatened, also result in the wife losing custody of her child.’

In 2015, Phil Collins bought Jennifer Lopez’s old house for $33 million. Collins then paid Mejjati, a builder by trade, to make substantial alterations to the property where Lopez broke up with longtime love Ben Affleck in 2004. Within months, Orianne had left her husband, and moved in with Collins.

The Miami Herald article is here.