Adams v. Adams

• Decision Date: 27 September 2004
• Docket Number: No. S04F0841.,S04F0841.
• Citation: Adams v. Adams, 278 Ga. 521, 603 S.E.2d 273 (Ga. 2004)
• Parties: ADAMS v. ADAMS.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

603 S.E.2d 273

278 Ga. 521

ADAMS v.ADAMS.

No. S04F0841.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

September 27, 2004.

R. Chris Phelps, Phelps & Campbell, LLP, Elberton, for Appellant.

Edward Donald Tolley, Ronald Edward Houser, Cook Noell Tolley Bates & Michael, LLP, for Appellee.

HUNSTEIN, Justice.

Andy (Husband) and Kay (Wife) Adams were married in July 1994.Two days before their wedding, they executed an antenuptial agreement which provided, inter alia, that in the event of a separation, Wife would receive $10,000 for every year of marriage with a cap of $100,000.Wife also waived all claims to Husband's pre-marital property and all other claims she may have growing out of the marriage and its dissolution; agreed not to make a "continued lifestyle claim"; and agreed to forfeit her rights if she engaged in "unforgiven adultery."Both parties waived claims to separately titled property whether acquired prior to or during the marriage.At the time of the marriage, Husband's assets were valued at $4,526,708, and Wife's at $30,000.

In January 2003, Wife filed for divorce alleging adultery, cruel treatment, and an irretrievably broken marriage.She sought alimony and an equitable division of property.Husband answered, counterclaimed for divorce, and filed a motion to enforce the antenuptial agreement which the trial court granted.Husband then filed a motion for summary judgment in the divorce action.Wife failed to file a response and a divorce was granted.The trial court ordered Husband to pay to Wife a lump sum payment of $90,000 representing the agreed-upon $10,000 for each year of their marriage.Wife filed an application to appeal from the trial court's order that we granted to determine whether the antenuptial agreement is unconscionable as a matter of law and whether the trial court improperly limited the scope of the hearing on Husband's motion to enforce the antenuptial agreement.Finding no error, we affirm.

1.In determining whether to enforce an antenuptial agreement in a divorce proceeding, a trial judge should consider whether: (1) the agreement was obtained through fraud, duress or mistake, or through misrepresentation or nondisclosure of material facts; (2) the agreement is unconscionable; and (3) the facts and circumstances have changed since the agreement was executed, so as to make its enforcement unfair and unreasonable.Scherer v. Scherer,249 Ga. 635, 641(3), 292 S.E.2d 662(1982).In this case, the trial court specifically found that the agreement was entered into without fraud, duress, mistake, coercion, or misrepresentation; it was reviewed by Wife; and Wife was advised of her right to and was given sufficient opportunity to obtain independent legal review of the agreement before its execution.Wife does not challenge these findings.Instead, she alleges that the agreement is unconscionable when comparing the financial...