In re Estate of Psota
297 Neb. 570
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Sharlene and Eldon Psota married in September 2011; each had prior marriages and children. A prenuptial agreement was negotiated and signed six days before the wedding after meetings with an attorney selected by Eldon. Sharlene requested and received some revisions before signing.
- The written prenuptial agreement disclaimed any right of inheritance or interest in the other party’s property, recited that each party made "frank and full disclosure" of property, attached exhibits listing real property (without valuations), but did not list personal property or include tax returns.
- Eldon’s will (executed about 8 years before the marriage) left nothing to Sharlene. Eldon died in August 2013; his estate inventory showed about $10 million in assets, mostly real property.
- Sharlene filed an application under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2320 to be treated as an omitted spouse; the estate asserted she waived her rights by the prenuptial agreement and invoked § 30-2316.
- The county court found the prenuptial agreement was a valid waiver under § 30-2316 and denied Sharlene’s omitted-spouse claim; Sharlene appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Sharlene) | Defendant's Argument (Estate) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the absence of valuations, personal property lists, and tax returns defeated the waiver under § 30-2316(b) | The agreement lacked fair and reasonable disclosure and thus did not give her adequate knowledge; waiver unenforceable | The agreement and disclosures (and Sharlene’s awareness) satisfy § 30-2316; waiver valid | Waiver enforceable; Sharlene failed to prove lack of adequate knowledge under § 30-2316(b)(2) (court did not reach this because of voluntariness failure) |
| Whether Sharlene executed the waiver "voluntarily" under § 30-2316(b)(1) | "Voluntarily" should be interpreted broadly (Edwards/Mamot factors); signing alone is insufficient | She signed at the attorney’s office without coercion; execution was voluntary | Court held Sharlene conceded she signed voluntarily; she did not prove lack of voluntariness, so she failed § 30-2316(b)(1) |
| Whether the word "or" must be read into § 30-2316(b) so that satisfying either subsection (1) or (2) defeats enforceability | Statute should be read like § 42-1006 (which uses "or") so proving either voluntariness or disclosure failure suffices | Legislature omitted "or" in § 30-2316(b); both subsections must be satisfied to defeat a waiver | Court declined to read "or" into § 30-2316(b); held a surviving spouse must satisfy both (b)(1) and (b)(2) to prove a waiver is unenforceable |
| Whether the court should apply the Edwards/Mamot five-factor test for voluntariness | Edwards/Mamot factors are controlling and show procedural/substantive problems with execution | Those factors conflate separate statutory elements and are unnecessary here; voluntariness is satisfied by intentional, uncoerced signature | Court declined to import Edwards/Mamot into § 30-2316(b)(1); found no error in county court’s voluntariness finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Mamot v. Mamot, 283 Neb. 659, 813 N.W.2d 440 (discusses burden to prove premarital agreement unenforceable and applies voluntariness factors)
- In re Estate of Pluhacek, 296 Neb. 528, 894 N.W.2d 325 (applies § 30-2316 in estate context)
- In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 295 Neb. 510, 890 N.W.2d 469 (explains appellate courts need not decide unnecessary issues)
- Edwards v. Edwards, 16 Neb. App. 297, 744 N.W.2d 243 (Court of Appeals case discussing voluntariness and factors later cited in Mamot)