Post

Marriage of Zucker

The court addressed important issues in California probate law.

Case Brief Full Opinion

Date Filed: April 01, 2022
Case Name: Marriage of Zucker
Case Number: B281051M
Court: California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four

The Court holds that when a premarital agreement limits spousal support, the trial court is not confined to the “unconscionable‑at‑execution” test of Family Code §1615(a)(2); under §1612(a)(7) the court may deem the provision unenforceable as contrary to public policy if it is unconscionable at the time of enforcement. Accordingly, the appellate court affirms the trial court’s finding that the Zucker premarital agreement’s spousal‑support limitation is void, corrects an arithmetic error in the attorney‑fee award (ordering Mark to pay Kim $870,000), and remands for determination of pendente‑lite spousal support. This decision expands judicial authority to invalidate premarital support waivers on public‑policy grounds, shaping how California courts treat such agreements in divorce and probate proceedings.


This case summary was prepared for educational purposes. For the authoritative version, please refer to the full opinion or the official California Courts website.

This post is licensed under CC BY 4.0 by the author.