When Coming to a Fork in the Road, Why Did KR not Choose the Divorce Path?
I'm no attorney, but I've always heard that a prenup that's presented as a fait accompli (especially on the wedding day!) and with no attorney for the spouse would be looked on pretty dubiously by the court.
Could KR have simply divorced Eric and gotten the money she wanted in a settlement after the prenup was invalidated?
@ch_13 Yes, agreeing --- a court would look upon that ^ dubiously, maybe/likely declare the prenup void. But pls indulge me by letting me reframe the question.
Briefly, in hypothetical divorce action, even if ct. says, Yep, prenup is void, so the prop. division will be made per UT's law, would that benefit her financially? IOW would she be better off w UT. divorce law's method of prop division, than w prenup agreement terms (azz-uming it addresses prop. division in conjunction w divorce)?
(Note: I'm not addressing alimony or child support issues, just prop. division)
From Utah statute:
"... the court may include in the decree of divorce equitable orders relating to the children, property, debts or obligations,..." *
From other UT. website re self help re divorce w more explanation at link.
"Utah law requires an equitable division of marital property." **
^ Concise wording^ but opinions in UT. case law flesh out nuances. Back to KR.
If KR had filed for divorce, say, Mar. 1, 2022 and argued she signed under duress, so agreement was void, then possibly judge would have agreed & ordered "equitable" prop. division per Utah law.
But a possible CATCH.
If she had filed for divorce at that time, imo, husband Eric would have likely have engaged legal counsel. He may or may not have contested the divorce itself but in discussing/negotiating prop. div'n, would have looked further into his, her, and their joint finances, and likely (undoubtedly w. accountant/CPA review) would have discovered KR's $ high jinks.
IIUC before marrying Kouri, Eric had $ & prop, and may over the course of their marriage, may have received more by gift or inheritance.
Say, hypothetically, that amounted to $ X mil. Likely held in Erik's name?
In considering filing for divorce, maybe consulting an atty, did Kouri realize ---
- in a divorce, she would not "get a cut" of Eric's $ X mil. of non-marital property?
- filing would expose her $$$,$$$ high jinks w Eric's $? (was it ~ $ 400,000? More?)
- she did not want a court to make an order re "property, debts, and obligations". if ct. could order her to pay $$$,$$$ (or could deduct the $$$,$$$ from the amt. of $/property otherwise allocated to her in ct.-ordered prop. div'n).
Imo, moo, jmo.
_________________________________________
* 30-3-5. Disposition of property ... Division of debts ..." (sbm)
"(2) When a decree of divorce is rendered, the court may include in the decree of divorce equitable orders relating to the children, property, debts or obligations..."
le.utah.gov
** From UT. St. Courts website, "plain language" re prop div'n at divorce.