Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 09-03-2024
Case Style:
In re the Marriage of: Stacy Ann Bednar v. Graig Richard Bednar
Case Number: 27-FA-19-6160
Judge:
Court: District Court, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
Minneapolis, Minnesota divorce lawyers represented the parties in a marriage dissolution.
On June 11, 2005, appellant Craig Richard Bednar (husband) and respondent Stacy Ann Bednar (wife) were married. During the marriage, the parties had two children, OB, born in 2006, and EB, born in 2010. EB has special medical, mental-health, and educational needs.
On June 10, the day before the parties' wedding, the parties signed an antenuptial agreement. The parties had negotiated the terms of the agreement over the course of several months, and each party had the assistance of counsel. The comprehensive agreement outlined the parties' property rights during the marriage and upon dissolution of the marriage. It also disclosed husband's assets, liabilities, and income. Husband possessed substantial assets prior to the marriage, including an interest in Tiger Oak Publications Inc., an interest in Lazzari + Santori Partners LLC, and certain real property.
In the antenuptial agreement, husband listed his net worth as $7,795,658. The agreement stated that Tiger Oak, Lazzari, and other specified assets were husband's "separate property" and defined "separate property" consistent with nonmarital property, i.e., acquired before marriage or by gift or inheritance.[1] See Minn. Stat. § 518.003, subd. 3b (2022) (defining nonmarital property). The agreement also defined marital property. The agreement granted each party exclusive use and control of their respective nonmarital property during the marriage.
The parties acknowledged that the agreement would determine their rights in the event of a marriage dissolution. Under the agreement, if a party petitioned for dissolution, neither party would be obligated to pay a liability incurred by the other in connection with their respective nonmarital property, unless specified in the agreement. The agreement granted each party a percentage of the marital property: 65% for husband and 35% for wife.
The parties agreed to arbitration.
The decision rendered by the arbitrator shall be final and binding, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered by any court having jurisdiction thereof. Arbitration shall be conducted by a single arbitrator chosen by the American Arbitration Association from its National Roster. The arbitrator shall have no other authority or jurisdiction other than that of determining the value of [husband's] net separate property and [wife's] net separate property.
Outcome: Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: