Earp v. Earp

ARNOLD, Judge.

Plaintiff assigns error to the trial court’s dismissal of her action and argues that she is entitled to specific performance of that portion of the contract which does not look to a future separation.

Defendant argues that the trial court correctly held the entire contract to be unenforceable since the only consideration given by plaintiff was performance of a pre-existing duty to fulfill her marital obligations.

We note at the outset that the agreement at issue was executed under seal and that consideration is therefore presumed. First Peoples Savings & Loan Association v.…