Question

Jim and Mary are about to be married.  Mary is a wealthy actress.  Jim is a struggling artist. Both agree that it would be a good idea to have a premarital agreement.  Mary gives Jim the agreement and suggests that Jim make an appointment to visit her tax preparer, whom Mary will instruct to give Jim a complete understanding of her assets. Laughing Jim replies, "Not necessary.  I'm insulted at the suggestion, my love."  A year after the marriage, the parties divorce. Mary seeks to enforce the premarital agreement, which provides that Jim waives spousal support and is not entitled to any of Mary's property in the event of divorce.  Jim argues that the agreement is unenforceable.  If you were the attorney representing Mary what would your arguments be for enforcement of the agreement? What arguments would you make in support of Jim's position?

Answer 1

Arguement in support of Mary:

It was responsblity of jim to read the agreement, if he has not read and have signed even though which is also notarised, its his fault.

Arguement in support of Jim:

Yes i will support jim's position, the agreement is unnforceable because as per the case says, he has not been briefed by the tax preparer in regards of the assets of mary, which is prominent part of the premarital agreement. It is necessay that their is consent of both the parties.

over and above,the final verdict will also depend upon the clause of arbitrager if any, his concent will be taken or no