What Happens to Prenups in Other States?

You signed a prenuptial agreement in one state, then life moved you somewhere else. If your marriage later ends, whose law decides whether that agreement still counts? The short answer is that a validly made prenuptial agreement is generally enforceable across state lines, but the state where you end up will apply its own rules and its own sense of public policy when it looks at your agreement. The Law Office of Chad Foster helps Snohomish County clients with prenuptial agreements.

A Contract That Travels, With Conditions

A prenuptial agreement is a contract, and contracts do not evaporate at a state border. Courts across the country routinely enforce agreements that were signed elsewhere. That said, enforcement is not automatic. When a couple divorces in a new state, the court there generally applies its own law to decide whether the agreement is valid and how it should be read. That means an agreement written to satisfy one state's requirements is being judged, later, by a court that may ask somewhat different questions.

This is why the state you signed in and the state you divorce in both matter. If the two states follow similar standards, the analysis is usually smooth. If they follow different standards, a court may still enforce the agreement, but the outcome can turn on which state's law governs and whether the agreement offends the new state's public policy. For related guidance, see Can Prenups Be Challenged in Court.

Two Different Rulebooks

Most states have adopted some version of the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, a model law meant to bring consistency to how these agreements are treated. Under that framework, a premarital agreement is generally enforceable unless the person challenging it can show that they did not sign voluntarily, or that the agreement was unconscionable when it was signed and they were not given fair disclosure of the other person's finances and did not otherwise know about them. The details vary from state to state, but the basic shape is similar wherever the uniform act has been adopted. For related guidance, see Can Prenups Be Verbal Agreements.

Washington is not one of those states. Washington has never adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, and instead uses a test built by its own Supreme Court in In re Marriage of Matson, 107 Wn.2d 479 (1986). Under Matson, a Washington court first asks whether the agreement makes a fair and reasonable provision for the spouse who is not trying to enforce it. If it does, the agreement stands. If it does not, the court then asks whether both spouses fully disclosed the amount, character, and value of their property, and whether the agreement was entered into voluntarily, on independent advice, and with full knowledge of the rights each person was surrendering. The state Supreme Court reaffirmed this two part framework in In re Marriage of Bernard, 165 Wn.2d 895 (2009), where it declined to enforce an agreement it found both substantively and procedurally unfair. So a couple who signs a prenuptial agreement in a uniform act state and later divorces in Snohomish County may find a Washington court measuring their agreement against the Matson standard rather than the standard they had in mind when they signed.

How Courts Decide Which Law Applies

When the states involved have different rules, a court has to sort out a conflict of laws question, which is simply the legal system's way of deciding which state's law governs a dispute that touches more than one state. Courts look at several things. Many prenuptial agreements include a choice of law clause, a provision stating which state's law the couple intends to govern the agreement, and courts often honor that choice. Even so, a court will not apply another state's law if doing so would violate a strong public policy of the state where the case is being heard. A court also considers where the agreement was signed, where the couple lived, and where the property is located.

The practical upshot is that a choice of law clause is helpful but not bulletproof. If the law the couple chose would produce a result the forum state finds deeply unfair or contrary to its own core policies, the court may decline to apply it. This is why an agreement that was airtight in the state where it was written can still face real scrutiny somewhere else.

What This Means If You Are Moving or Have Moved

If you signed a prenuptial agreement in another state and have since moved to Washington, or expect to, it is worth having the agreement reviewed here rather than assuming it will be enforced exactly as written. A review can tell you whether the agreement would likely satisfy the Matson standard, whether the disclosure and independent counsel questions were adequately addressed when you signed, and whether anything about the move changes the picture. In some cases, couples decide to sign a new agreement or an amendment that squarely meets Washington's requirements, which can be far easier than discovering a problem in the middle of a divorce.

The same caution runs the other way. If you signed your agreement in Washington but expect to live elsewhere, understand that a future court in that state may test your agreement against its own law and its own public policy, not Washington's.

Have Your Agreement Reviewed

If you moved to Snohomish County with a prenuptial agreement signed somewhere else, the Law Office of Chad Foster can review it against Washington law and help you understand how it is likely to hold up here. Reaching out before a dispute arises is always the stronger position.