Wulf v. Wulf

• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: ROSE, Justice.
• Citation: Wulf v. Wulf, 129 Neb. 158, 261 N.W. 159 (Neb. 1935)
• Decision Date: 24 May 1935
• Docket Number: 29277.
• Parties: WULF v. WULF ET AL.

261 N.W. 159

129 Neb. 158

WULF v. WULF ET AL.

No. 29277.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

May 24, 1935

Syllabus by the Court.

1. " A court of equity, when called upon to consider an antenuptial contract, should examine and construe the instrument in the light of the circumstances surrounding that particular case, and enforce or annul the agreement according to the facts disclosed in the case before it." Rieger v. Schaible, 81 Neb. 33, 115 N.W. 560, 17 L.R.A.(N.S.) 866, 16 Ann.Cas. 700.

2. Where each party to an antenuptial contract knows, or is properly chargeable with knowledge of, the extent and value of the other's property, a disproportion between the contractual provision for the wife and the amount allowed by the statute of descent does not shift to the husband the burden of proving a full disclosure in an action wherein the wife demands the cancellation of the contract on the ground of fraudulent concealment on his part.

3. Under the facts outlined in the opinion, the antenuptial contract copied therein held not void on the ground that the husband had not fully disclosed in advance the nature and extent of his property or on the ground of an unfair disproportion between the contractual provision for the wife and the amount allowed by the statute of descent.

4. In an antenuptial contract, the mutual release by each party of all interest in the farm lands of the other is a sufficient consideration as to both parties.

Appeal from District Court, Thayer County; Proudfit, Judge.

Action by Emma Wulf against William H. Wulf and others. From an adverse judgment, defendants appeal.

Judgment reversed, and action dismissed.

Baldwin & Baldwin, of Hebron, and Sloans, Keenan & Corbitt of Geneva, for appellants.

Walter C. Weiss, of Hebron, and Hall, Cline & Williams, of Lincoln for appellee.

Heard before GOSS, C. J., and ROSE, GOOD, EBERLY, DAY, PAINE, and CARTER, JJ.

ROSE Justice.

This is an action by Emma Wulf, plaintiff, for the partition of 410 acres of land in Thayer county, near Deshler, of which her husband, Henry Wulf, died seised September 21, 1932, without leaving a will. The action was commenced April 14, 1933, while the estate of decedent was in the course of settlement; William H. Wulf, being administrator. Intestate, Henry Wulf, in addition to plaintiff, his widow, left surviving him William H. Wulf and Albert F. Wulf, sons, and Alma Wulf and Clara Wulf Ehlers, daughters. These sons and daughters were adult children by the former wife of decedent. Henry Wulf was the third husband of plaintiff. She was not the mother of any of his children, but had three living children of her own as the issue of her first marriage. The sons and daughters of decedent are defendants. The administrator, the wife of William H. Wulf, the wife of Albert F. Wulf, and the husband of Clara Wulf Ehlers are also defendants.

Plaintiff claims an undivided one-fourth interest in the 410 acres of land described in her petition and that each of decedent's sons and daughters is entitled to three-sixteenths thereof. The relief sought by plaintiff depends upon the invalidity of an antenuptial contract, a copy of which follows:

" Antenuptial Contract

This agreement made and entered into on this 24th day of December, 1927, by and between Henry Wulf, a widower, of Deshler, Thayer county, Nebraska, and Emma Harms, a widow, of Deshler, Thayer county, Nebraska.

Witnesseth: That the parties to this contract have agreed to become man and wife and each of said parties have property and heirs at law and that each of them desire to keep their own property in their own name and that the separate property now owned by each of them shall descend to the lawful heirs of said parties just as it would to had this intended marriage not been contracted.

It is hereby agreed by each of said parties that in case the said Henry Wulf shall depart this life leaving the said Emma Harms a widow that she shall have his town property valued at about $5,000 located in Deshler, Nebraska, being the home of the said Henry Wulf.

It is further agreed that no part of the property belonging to either of the parties hereto shall descend to the other except the homestead hereinbefore described and each party to this contract hereby releases all estate, personal property and real estate belonging to each other and waives any claim that either of them might have on the property of the other and that the property of each of them shall descend to their respective heirs except the town property which is especially given to Emma Harms.

This agreement shall be binding upon the executors, administrators and heirs of each of the parties hereto.

Witness our hands and seals the day and the year last above written.

In the presence of:

J. P. Baldwin Henry Wulf

Doris McDonald Emma Harms."

This contract was signed by the parties to it, acknowledged by them before a notary public and officially recorded December 24, 1927. Its validity was put in issue by formal pleadings.

Upon a trial of the cause the district court canceled the antenuptial contract as void, confirmed in plaintiff title to the undivided one-fourth of the land in controversy as her share under the statute of descent and ordered a partition as prayed in her petition. Defendants appealed.

Propositions argued by plaintiff in support of the decree canceling the antenuptial contract which she made with Henry Wulf before they were married may be summarized for the purposes of a trial de novo, as follows: The provision made for her was grossly disproportionate to the amount she would have received from his estate under the law, if the antenuptial contract had not been made. She was not aware of the nature, character and value of the estate she was relinquishing when entering into the antenuptial contract. A full and fair disclosure of the character, extent and value of Henry Wulf's property was not made before she signed the agreement. It was obtained by concealment and actual fraud. The burden was on the persons relying upon the validity of the antenuptial contract to prove that a just and fair disclosure was made to plaintiff before she signed it.

On the other hand, defendants contend that there was no evidence of such gross disproportion as to cast on them the burden of proving a full, fair and timely disclosure of the value, extent and character of decedent's property; that the antenuptial contract should not be set aside in equity without competent evidence that a full and fair disclosure of the extent, character and value of the property was not made; that the written instrument should not be canceled without competent evidence that plaintiff was not aware to all intents and purposes of the nature, character and value of the estate relinquished by her in the event of marriage; that invalidity of the contract was not proved; that it is valid and prevents partition at the suit of plaintiff.

The validity of an antenuptial contract depends upon the...