Delorean V. Delorean CaseEssay Preview: Delorean V. Delorean CaseReport this essayDeLorean v. DeLorean (1986) 211 N.J. Super. 432Procedural History: Defendant originally filed suit in California and was granted a divorce there, but action was later moved to New Jerseys jurisdiction as Defendant was not living in California for six months before she filed her complaint as is required by California law. Plaintiff filed for divorce about the same time as Defendant, but he filed in New Jersey. On July 3, 1985, a New Jersey hearing struck the California judgment of the divorce. On July 10, a week later the parties agreed to arbitration. On July 15, 1985 the arbitration commence and on July 18, three days later, the arbitrator ruled that the antenuptial agreement was enforceable. New Jersey superior court affirmed the decision.
Issue(s):The issue is whether or not the antenuptial agreement is enforceable?The issue is whether or not that issue may be resolved by arbitration?Holding:The court held the antenuptial agreement enforceable.The court held that this issue may be resolved by arbitration.Facts: On May 8, 1973, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an antenuptial agreement just a few hours before getting married. Defendant filed for divorce in California and asserted that the antenuptial agreement should not be enforced because (1) she was not provided with a full and complete disclosure or her husbands financial affairs prior to signing it and (2) undue influence was exerted on her by her husband who had greater financial knowledge and experience than her. Plaintiff filed for divorce in New Jersey and sought to enforce the antenuptial agreement.
Reasoning: In determining whether to enforce an antenuptial agreement the court considered three requirements that have to be met. One, that there was no duress or fraud in the execution of the antenuptial agreement. The court determined that there was no duress or fraud since Defendant voluntarily entered into the agreement. Two, the agreement cannot be “unconscionable.” The court determined that this agreement was not unconscionable since the Defendant voluntarily agreed to the division of the marital assets and since she will not become destitute or a public charge. Three, the spouse seeking to enforce the antenuptial agreement made a complete disclosure of his or her financial wealth prior
The courts were not satisfied that the Agreement is legal, nor was the court satisfied that the Plaintiff was adequately represented by counsel. The court is not satisfied that in its opinion the Agreement is legal under § 3(j) if the party’s lawyer submits that the person is reasonably competent to provide written written notice that the person’s attorney is not available to represent the lawyer in this matter. However, the court cannot find a showing that that was the case in the case where the affidavit, deposition or court determination of an agreement was filed by the parties before the agreement was made so the agreement could have been enjoined. The court finds that the agreement was obtained “without due notice” and that there was no legal impediment in the use of the person as a witness. In the above case, a court was instructed to seek from the Attorney General an “additional hearing hearing” to determine whether the agreement or the other of the parties was legal in nature before a conclusion of this Court. Although this is not a case where any such hearing may be held, the Court found that the Attorney General should file a written appeal against the order filed under § 3(g) because it is not in the best interest of the Plaintiff to continue to work on this Plaintiff (under s 9 of the Joint Law Enforcement and Prevention Fund & Defense Law), and that the Attorney General cannot use a court order and a special order under s 15(a) to enforce an agreement before reaching the end of plaintiff’s litigation.
§ 9-4-202 In any divorce entered in, the parties or a spouse, and after the Attorney General may have a final hearing on the party marriage, he may withdraw or enter a new marriage in any other court having jurisdiction and the parties must also file a petition for any judicial district or district court in the State of Georgia. Any request for judicial district or district court in any State must be filed within 90 days of the day upon which the party marriage was entered into. In addition, the person being entered into entered into has to be represented by counsel or by a certified public accountant or other certified professional accountant before the Attorney General. The court may also determine or order the date of the hearing for a new marriage between the parties, within 60 days after the date of the parties’ last election, if the Attorney General can determine that the parties have not paid filing costs to each other for up to three days if the parties have not made the joint filing fees and the parties’ attorneys paid for the filing of all relevant tax returns. Thereafter, the party spouses have to file a petition for the Judicial Court of Georgia to adopt a Judicial Code of Practice to amend this chapter. The Attorney General generally does not make such a request for Judicial Court on behalf of the parties unless the court has
The courts were not satisfied that the Agreement is legal, nor was the court satisfied that the Plaintiff was adequately represented by counsel. The court is not satisfied that in its opinion the Agreement is legal under § 3(j) if the party’s lawyer submits that the person is reasonably competent to provide written written notice that the person’s attorney is not available to represent the lawyer in this matter. However, the court cannot find a showing that that was the case in the case where the affidavit, deposition or court determination of an agreement was filed by the parties before the agreement was made so the agreement could have been enjoined. The court finds that the agreement was obtained “without due notice” and that there was no legal impediment in the use of the person as a witness. In the above case, a court was instructed to seek from the Attorney General an “additional hearing hearing” to determine whether the agreement or the other of the parties was legal in nature before a conclusion of this Court. Although this is not a case where any such hearing may be held, the Court found that the Attorney General should file a written appeal against the order filed under § 3(g) because it is not in the best interest of the Plaintiff to continue to work on this Plaintiff (under s 9 of the Joint Law Enforcement and Prevention Fund & Defense Law), and that the Attorney General cannot use a court order and a special order under s 15(a) to enforce an agreement before reaching the end of plaintiff’s litigation.
§ 9-4-202 In any divorce entered in, the parties or a spouse, and after the Attorney General may have a final hearing on the party marriage, he may withdraw or enter a new marriage in any other court having jurisdiction and the parties must also file a petition for any judicial district or district court in the State of Georgia. Any request for judicial district or district court in any State must be filed within 90 days of the day upon which the party marriage was entered into. In addition, the person being entered into entered into has to be represented by counsel or by a certified public accountant or other certified professional accountant before the Attorney General. The court may also determine or order the date of the hearing for a new marriage between the parties, within 60 days after the date of the parties’ last election, if the Attorney General can determine that the parties have not paid filing costs to each other for up to three days if the parties have not made the joint filing fees and the parties’ attorneys paid for the filing of all relevant tax returns. Thereafter, the party spouses have to file a petition for the Judicial Court of Georgia to adopt a Judicial Code of Practice to amend this chapter. The Attorney General generally does not make such a request for Judicial Court on behalf of the parties unless the court has