Shaban

Shaban v. Shaban

Good Law
88 Cal. App. 4th 398
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 2001Nos. G024572, G025498California4,942 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sills, J.

This appeal presents a situation that not only reaches the outer limits of the ability of a prospective married couple to incorporate by reference terms into a prenuptial agreement, but so far exceeds those limits as to fall off the edge. It is one thing for a couple to agree to basic terms, and choose the system of law that they want to govern the construction or interpretation of their premarital agreement. (See Fam. Code, § 1612, subd. (a)(6) [“Parties to a premarital agreement may contract with respect to . . . [¶| . . . [¶] The choice of law governing the construction of the agreement”].) It is quite another to say, without any agreement as to basic terms, that a marriage will simply be governed by a given system of law and then hope that parol evidence will supply those basic terms.

Here, a couple who married in Egypt in 1974 had their marriage dissolved after living in the United States for about 17 years. In the course of the *401 proceedings, the husband asserted that the couple had a written prenuptial agreement. The document that he claimed was the prenuptial agreement was a one-page piece of paper written in Arabic and signed by him and his future…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.