Defendant's Attorney:

Description: Phoenix, Arizona family law lawyers represented the husband and wife in a divorce.

Husband and Wife wed in April 2019. They have one child in common, L.H., born in November 2020. In July 2022, Husband filed a Petition for Dissolution of Non-Covenant Marriage. Later that month, Wife filed a Response to Petition for Dissolution of a Non-Covenant Marriage (Divorce) with Minor Children ("Response").

Wife's Response asserted that the parties had a "written agreement signed by both parties about . . . division of property/debt[.]" Wife attached the written agreement, an Islamic marriage contract (the "Agreement"), to her Response. The Agreement, signed by both parties before the marriage, provided that Husband committed to deliver to Wife a "full amount of $25,000 [and] one [k]ilogram of gold grade 21 dowry[.]" The Agreement provided that Husband was to deliver the kilogram of gold to Wife "at any time she requests it." As to the $25,000 amount, the Agreement describes Husband's duty to pay the amount as "deferred" while also describing it as "advanced[.]"

After a bench trial in February 2024, the court issued a Decree of Dissolution of Marriage ("Decree") on May 2, 2024, dissolving the parties' marriage and awarding both parties joint legal decision-making as well as joint parenting time with L.H. The court also ordered Husband to pay Wife $1,100 per month of child support. Moreover, the court ordered Husband to pay Wife $6,000 "as past support for the three-year period prior to filing of the current petition until [the issuance of the Decree]." Finally, the court partially enforced the Agreement, awarding Wife "one [k]ilogram of gold grade 21." The court did not, however, enforce the $25,000 provision, finding the Agreement's language describing the payment both as "advanced" and "deferred" was contradictory and most likely "a typographical error[.]"

* * *

Legal issue Is a premarital agreement enforceable in awarding gold to a spouse in a dissolution of marriage case?
Headnote

FAMILY LAW. PREMARITAL AGREEMENTS. The case involves the enforcement of a premarital agreement under neutral principles of law, where the court upheld the award of a kilogram of gold to the wife but found the term concerning a $25,000 payment unenforceable due to vague language in the contract.

FAMILY LAW. CHILD SUPPORT. The court addressed an improper award of retroactive child support when the wife conceded to not having requested such support, leading to the vacation of that portion of the judgment.

FAMILY LAW. SANCTIONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE. The court vacated a monetary sanction against the husband for failing to deliver gold, as the wife disclaimed the punitive award, and the sanction was not prescribed within the context of civil contempt procedures.

Key Phrases Premarital agreement enforcement. Retroactive child support. Sanctions award. Islamic marriage contract. Joint legal decision-making.

Outcome: Reversed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: