Cadwell-Faso v. Faso
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
REARDON, J.
Family Code1 section 1615, subdivision (c) (section 1615(c)), as amended effective January 1, 2002, creates a presumption “that a premarital agreement was not executed voluntarily” unless the court makes five designated findings. (See Stats. 2001, ch. 286, § 2, p. 2317; In re Marriage of Friedman (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 65, 72 [122 Cal.Rptr.2d 412].) These include the finding that the party against whom enforcement is sought had at least seven calendar days between the date he or she was “first presented” with the agreement and advised to seek independent counsel, and the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- In Re Marriage of BondsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Munson v. Del Taco, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2009
- In Re Marriage of Falcone & FykeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Phelps v. StostadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hill v. DittmerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Clarke v. Akel (In re Clarke), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- In re Estate of PsotaNebraska Supreme Court · 2017
- Last v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2023
- Marriage of Csupo CA2/1California Court of Appeal · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.