Summary
The Louisiana Second Circuit considered whether a prenuptial agreement establishing a separate-property regime was invalid because the wife allegedly failed to understand its contents and was not advised by independent counsel. The court held that her failure to read the straightforward agreement did not establish a basis for invalidation and that the notary, who was also associated with the husband, had no attorney-client relationship with her. The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment granting the husband’s motion for a directed verdict and assessed costs to the appellant.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in granting John's motion for a directed verdict or involuntary dismissal on Felicia's challenge to the prenuptial agreement.
- Whether Felicia could avoid the prenuptial agreement based on her failure to read it and alleged lack of advice from the notary-attorney who notarized her signature.
- Whether the parties' filing of joint tax returns and acquisition of property during the marriage indicated a conversion from the separate-property regime to a community-property regime.
Holdings
- A party who signs an instrument without reading it is bound by the instrument and cannot invalidate an authentic prenuptial agreement merely by claiming ignorance of its contents or legal effects, absent sufficient proof of deception or another legally cognizable basis for avoidance.
- The attorney who merely notarized Felicia's signature did not owe her attorney-client duties where she did not hire him to represent her, did not communicate with him about the agreement, and had no objectively reasonable basis to believe that he represented her interests.
- The trial court's conclusion was reasonable in light of the record and therefore was not manifestly erroneous.
- Filing joint tax returns and acquiring property during the marriage do not automatically convert or otherwise establish an intent to convert a separate-property regime into a community-property regime.
Key quotations
“This court will not allow her to invalidate an authentic act/agreement that she signed by arguing ignorance on her part.” (4)
“The law of Louisiana is that one who signs an instrument without reading it has no complaint.” (7)
Factual background
Felicia and John married in 2003 after separately executing an authentic prenuptial agreement three days before the wedding. The agreement renounced Louisiana's community-property regime and declared all property owned or acquired during the marriage to be separate property. Felicia testified that she did not read the agreement, did not hire independent counsel, and believed it preserved premarital assets while allowing a community regime during the marriage; the document was notarized by David Post, an attorney and business associate of John. The court found no sufficient evidence that Felicia was deceived, prevented from understanding the agreement, or that the parties later altered the separate-property regime.
Procedural history
Felicia filed for divorce in 2021 and challenged the prenuptial agreement that established a separate-property regime. The trial court denied John's exception of no right of action, partially granted his motion in limine, and proceeded to trial on the agreement's validity. After Felicia presented her evidence, the court granted John's motion for a directed verdict, dismissed the case with prejudice, and assessed costs to Felicia. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed.