Some divorcing parties fight over huge sums of money and property, while others have nothing but personal property over which to fight. No matter the value of the marital estate, many divorcing couples will find something over which to fight tooth and nail. In the case of Wal-Mart heiress Paige Laurie Dubbert, her soon to be ex-husband, Patrick “Bo” Dubbert, is fighting to invalidate their prenuptial agreement, despite the fact that the agreement gives him $30,000 a month for three years (half of the length of their marriage). Here’s What a Wal-Mart Prenup Looks Like, by TMZ Staff, tmz.com, November 21, 2014. Many people would be thrilled with over a million dollars, but he apparently thinks he can get more.
Bo lists several reasons why he thinks the agreement should be thrown out. First, he says that he originally had a lawyer to help him negotiate the prenup, but that Paige’s lawyer told him that his lawyer didn’t know what she was doing and “had never dealt with billionaires.” He, thus, thinks that Paige’s lawyer deviously convinced him to fire her. Second, Bo alleges he was pressured into signing the prenup quickly when Paige’s parents told him if he didn’t sign it before they returned from a trip, they wouldn’t pay for the wedding planner.
In Georgia, there is a three-part test for enforceability of prenuptial agreements. This test is similarly used in the majority of jurisdictions throughout the country. The party seeking enforcement of the agreement must prove that: (1) the prenuptial agreement was not the result of fraud, duress, mistake, misrepresentation, or nondisclosure of material facts; (2) the agreement is not unconscionable; and (3) taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances, including changes beyond the parties’ contemplation when the agreement was executed, enforcement of the prenuptial agreement would be neither unfair or unreasonable. Scherer v. Scherer, 249 Ga. 635 (1982).
Thus, in general, a prenup is likely to be upheld so long as it was entered into voluntarily and there was no deception in regards to each party’s full disclosure of assets, income and liabilities. Here, there does not seem to be any allegation that Paige failed to disclose assets. Thus, in determining the validity of the prenuptial agreement, a court will have to determine whether Bo signed the agreement voluntarily. The court will look at all evidence surrounding execution of the agreement, including Bo’s allegation that there was some sort of coercion and duress involved by both Paige’s attorney and her parents. Without further details, it is impossible to speculate how this case will turn out but, either way, Bo will likely be financially well off – assuming he does not spend all his money in attorney’s fees.