In re the Marriage of Traster, 291 P.3d 494

Debra and David Tras-ter executed a postmarital agreement during marriage outlining rights if the marriage ended; they later divorced after 25+ years.
The district court treated the postmarital agreement as a separation agreement under Kansas law and reviewed it for validity, fairness, and equity.
The court found the agreement invalid, arguing it ran counter to public policy and resulted in unjust distribution favoring Debra.
Debra appealed, arguing the court should enforce the postmarital agreement as written and not apply separation-agreement standards.
The court ultimately reversed, held the postmarital agreement enforceable, and remanded to enforce it as written with attorney-fee implications under an indemnity clause.
The judgment was reported to influence the division of assets and an attorney-fee award consistent with the postmarital agreement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the postmarital agreement is contrary to public policy	Tras-ter contends it encouraged divorce and is invalid	Debra argues it does not promote divorce and is enforceable	Not contrary to public policy; enforceable as written
What standard governs enforceability of a postmarital agreement	Debra argues to apply general contract principles; not separation rules	David argues for separation-agreement standards	Adopted separate, contract-based standard appropriate to postmarital agreements; enforceable under six-factor test
Whether Debra is entitled to attorney fees under indemnity	Debra seeks fees under indemnity provision	David challenges fee award absent statutory basis	Indemnity provision enforceable; Debra entitled to attorney fees
Whether remand was necessary or the record sufficed to decide enforceability	Record insufficient to apply new standard	Record adequate for decision without remand	Remand unnecessary; record sufficient to apply six-factor enforceability standard

National Bank of Andover v. Kansas Bankers Surety Co., 290 Kan. 247 (2010) (public policy in contract analysis; not contrary to public policy unless stated)
Ranney v. Ranney, 219 Kan. 428 (1976) (marriage public policy; encourage enduring marriages)
Matlock v. Matlock, 223 Kan. 679 (1978) (premarital/postmarital contract enforceability limited by public policy)
In re Estate of Cooper, 195 Kan. 174 (1965) (contracts may promote divorce if obligate one to divorce)
Bedrick v. Bedrick, 300 Conn. 691 (2011) (postnuptial scrutiny factors; six-factor framework)
Ansin v. Craven-Ansin, 457 Mass. 283 (2010) (six-factor enforceability framework for postmarital agreements)
Davis v. Miller, 269 Kan. 732 (2000) (premarital/postmarital enforceability standards; reference for disclosure and voluntariness)