Judgment in parties’ divorce case, affirmed, as trial court did not err in enforcing parties’ prenuptial agreement; evidence supported trial court’s finding that wife received full financial disclosure prior to signing agreement, agreement was not unconscionable, wife knew husband for many years prior to their courtship and was aware of vast disparity between husband’s income as business owner and her own prior to their marriage, and wife did not show that increase in husband’s net worth over their nearly 20-year marriage presented change in circumstance that would make enforcement of agreement unfair and unreasonable; trial court’s decision to enforce prenuptial agreement disposed of all of wife’s counterclaims, which dealt with matters agreement specifically covered.

Sides v. Sides, S11F1140 (11/07/11)

Fulton County Daily Report, November 18, 2011

Judgment awarding wife $160K as her equitable interest in parties’ marital home, AFFIRMED.  Trial court did not abuse its discretion in setting aside parties’ antenuptial agreement, since parties did not live together before marriage and husband actively hid fact that he had $150K in cash in his possession when parties signed agreement;  Mallen v. Mallen, 280 Ga. 43(2005), did not overrule first prong of three-prong test in Scherer v. Scherer, 249 Ga. 635 (1982), which provides that antenuptial agreements must not be obtained through nondisclosure of material facts.

Blige v. Blige, S07F1817 (01/28/08), 08 FCDR 208

Fulton County Daily Report, 02/08/2008.

GA judgment upholding validity and enforceability of parties’ antenuptial agreement, AFFIRMED, 5-2; agreement was clearly contract made in contemplation of divorce, not contract made in contemplation of marriage, thus, agreement was not subject to OCGA 19-3-63′s dual attestation requirement – agreement addressed alimony and referred explicitly to possibility of divorce; record supported trial court’s finding that there are adequate pre-execution disclosure of husband’s financial statue – parties dated and/or lived together for more than 3.5 years before marriage, wife knew that husband owned professional building where she worked and wife knew that husband had siccessful real estte practice and knew about roughly 95 peson of land he owned when she signed agreement.

Lawrence v. Lawrence, S09A1370 (11/09/09)

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (November 20, 2009)

Grant of partial summary judgment to husband in parties’ divorce case, REVERSED, as fact question remained regarding whether husband disclosed his income to wife prior to execution of prenuptial agreement;  wife did not have duty to inquire as to husband’s financial situation and insufficient evidence existed for Court to conclude as matter of law that parties’ standard of living prior to marriage put wife on notice that husband failed to disclose material facts so as to render nondisclosure immaterial.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/09/09)

Quarles v. Quarles, S09A0928 (09/28/09), 09 FCDR 3046

Attorney:  Terry D. Tolbert, Lawrence L. Washburn III

Judges: Valerie Head, Gwinnett Superior Court; Supreme Court of GA, Carley

Denial of wife’s motion for partial summary judgment, REVERSED, in parties’ divorce case, as trial court erred in finding that parties’ antenuptial agreement was enforceable under OCGA 19-3-63 because it was not signed by two attesting witnesses; agreement constituted marriage contract, entered into in consideration of marriage, which must be attested by at least two witnesses, rather than agreement in contemplation of divorce, because agreement waived each spouses’ rights in others property and did not mention either divorce or alimony.

From:  Fulton County Daily Report (10/09/09)

Sullivan v. Sullivan, S09A0928 (09/28/09), 09FCDR 3046

Attorneys: Martin L. Fierman, Jeremy A. Moulton

Judges:  William A. Prior Jr., Morgan Superior Court;  Supreme Court of GA:  Carley