Ratony Estate
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Mb. Justice Jones:
I reluctantly must dissent from the view expressed by the majority opinion.
It appears to me that the majority, by reiterating the “reasonable provision or full and fair disclosure” test, has lost sight of the necessity for consideration for this so-called postnuptial agreement. In cases turn*467ing on the “reasonable provision” standard, there is generally no occasion to question whether there is any consideration; the usual inquiry is whether a sufficient amount has been given. On the other hand, an implied corollary to the “full and fair disclosure” test…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lindenfelser v. LindenfelserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Kaufmann EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- King EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- De Luca v. De LucaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Matheny EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.