Legal Opinion
Michael v. Howell
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 24, 2011No. D056693PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BENKE, Acting P. J.
Our Legislature in 2002 amended Family Code1 section 1612 to invalidate any provision in a premarital agreement regarding spousal support, including, but not limited to, a waiver of such support if (i) the party against whom enforcement of the spousal support provision is sought was not represented by independent counsel at the time the agreement containing the provision was signed or (ii) that provision is unconscionable at the time of enforcement. (§ 1612, subd. (c).)
The issue before us—which has yet to be decided in this state—is whether subdivision (c) of section…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Evangelatos v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Western Security Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- In Re Marriage of BondsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Williams v. GarcettiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- McClung v. Employment Development DepartmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Scott v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Facter v. FacterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Hill v. DittmerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Zarubin v. Miotke (In re Miotke), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Marriage of Mesbah CA4/3California Court of Appeal · 2013
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.