At Spodek Law Group P.C., we have seen prenuptial agreements from every angle: before a wedding, during a review years later, and in contested divorce litigation. A prenup should be drafted as though a capable lawyer may attack it a decade from now. That means protecting the substance of the deal and getting every execution detail right.
Why execution details matter.
Many prenuptial agreements are challenged only when divorce is approaching, because setting the agreement aside may be the only path to property or support the agreement otherwise waives. That is why the lawyer drafting it should understand not only matrimonial planning, but also how the document will be attacked in litigation.
When a New York marital agreement fails, the problem is not always that its bargain was unfair. It may be an acknowledgment certificate, a missing financial figure, or a signing process that did not satisfy the statute. In our experience, careful execution is every bit as important as careful negotiation.
If you are getting married in New York-or signed a prenup years ago and have not reviewed it since-this is how the law works in 2026.
New York requires deed-level acknowledgment.
Domestic Relations Law § 236(B)(3) imposes three formal requirements. The agreement must be in writing, subscribed by both parties, and “acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded.”
That last requirement is where agreements can fail. A proper acknowledgment generally requires the signer to appear before a notary or other authorized officer, acknowledge that the signer executed the instrument, and establish the signer’s identity. The officer then completes a certificate that substantially follows New York’s statutory form. See Real Property Law § 309-a.
Matisoff and Galetta: small defects, major consequences.
New York’s Court of Appeals has applied that rule strictly. In Matisoff v. Dobi, 90 N.Y.2d 127 (1997), both spouses admitted signing a postnuptial agreement. The agreement was nevertheless unenforceable because it had not been acknowledged as the statute requires.
In Galetta v. Galetta, 21 N.Y.3d 186 (2013), the parties did appear before notaries, but the husband’s certificate did not state that the notary confirmed his identity as the person described in the agreement. The Court of Appeals held the prenup unenforceable.
A missing acknowledgment-or a materially defective certificate-can undo an agreement the parties knowingly signed. If your prenup came from a generic online form or was signed without a matrimonial lawyer supervising the formalities, do not assume you are protected. Have the signed agreement and every acknowledgment certificate reviewed. If a defect cannot be cured and you are already married, a properly negotiated postnuptial agreement may be an option.
What a New York prenup can-and cannot-control.
A properly executed New York prenup can classify assets as separate property, address a premarital business and its appreciation, opt the parties out of statutory equitable distribution rules, and set or waive spousal maintenance subject to statutory limits. It can also waive a surviving spouse’s elective share, an important consideration in second marriages when each spouse wants assets to pass to that spouse’s own children.
Custody and child support are different. Parties may record their intentions, but they cannot bind a court to a custody arrangement that is inconsistent with the child’s best interests or bargain away a child’s right to adequate support. Those issues remain subject to Domestic Relations Law § 240 and the facts that exist when a dispute reaches the court.
For child support, New York applies the Child Support Standards Act to current financial information. Effective March 1, 2026, the combined parental-income cap increased from $183,000 to $193,000. For combined income above the cap, the court determines additional support by considering the statutory factors and/or applying the statutory percentages.
The 2025 maintenance-waiver decision.
On January 2, 2025, Justice Jeffrey Sunshine issued an important Kings County trial-level decision in J.M. v. G.V., 2025 NY Slip Op 25004. The prenup had been signed one week before the parties’ 2018 wedding. The husband was not represented by counsel. When the wife filed for divorce in 2023, he moved to set the agreement aside.
The court rejected the claim that the timing, standing alone, established duress and upheld the agreement’s property provisions. But it vacated the maintenance waiver.
The agreement recited the statutory maintenance formula without including the parties’ incomes or calculating the presumptive award. The court concluded that the unrepresented husband could not knowingly waive an amount the agreement never calculated. The maintenance provision also lacked enough information for the court to determine that the waiver complied with General Obligations Law § 5-311, which prohibits a support waiver that is likely to leave a spouse incapable of self-support and a public charge. A severability clause preserved the balance of the agreement.
What J.M. v. G.V. means for drafting today.
J.M. v. G.V. is a trial-court decision, not statewide appellate precedent, but it is a serious drafting warning. Boilerplate maintenance waivers deserve review-especially where a party was unrepresented or the agreement merely recited the formula.
A waiver drafted today should identify both parties’ actual incomes, show the applicable presumptive maintenance calculation, explain the departure or waiver, and address the public-charge restriction. Existing agreements that omit those protections should be reviewed. If an update is appropriate after marriage, the cost of a carefully prepared postnuptial agreement can be far less than litigating the issue during divorce.
Financial disclosure should be documented.
We often recommend detailed schedules of assets, liabilities, and income attached to the agreement-not a handshake understanding that “she knows about the business.” New York decisions explain that nondisclosure by itself does not automatically invalidate every prenup. But concealment, an affirmative misrepresentation, or nondisclosure that contributes to an unfair bargain can support claims of fraud or overreaching. See Gottlieb v. Gottlieb, 138 A.D.3d 30 (1st Dep’t 2016).
Complete schedules create a record of what each person knew and what each person agreed to waive. Hiding an account does not protect it; it creates evidence for the challenge that follows.
Last-minute signing is not automatically duress.
People often assume that a prenup signed on the eve of a wedding is automatically void. It is not. New York courts have enforced last-minute agreements, and J.M. v. G.V. held that the threat of a canceled wedding seven days away was not enough, by itself, to establish duress. Timing still matters because it can strengthen a challenge when combined with pressure, deception, inadequate review, or other inequitable conduct.
Fraud is a different issue. In Cioffi-Petrakis v. Petrakis, 103 A.D.3d 766 (2d Dep’t 2013), the Second Department affirmed a judgment setting aside a prenup after the trial court credited evidence that the husband induced the wife to sign by promising that the agreement would be destroyed once they had children.
Challenging or enforcing a New York prenup.
A spouse challenging a prenup may examine defective acknowledgment under Galetta, fraud in the inducement under Cioffi-Petrakis, concealment or misrepresentation, duress, overreaching, and unconscionability. Under the standard associated with Christian v. Christian, 42 N.Y.2d 63 (1977), unconscionability requires an extreme inequality-an agreement no sensible person would make and no honest and fair person would accept.
The existence of a claim does not mean the challenge will succeed. Properly executed agreements are not lightly discarded. The complete signing record, disclosure exchanged, negotiations, counsel involved, and the agreement’s terms all matter.
How Spodek Law Group P.C. drafts and litigates prenups.
We treat every prenup as a document that may be attacked by a good lawyer ten years later, because it might be. That means deliberate timing, independent counsel when possible, documented disclosure, current maintenance calculations, a compliant acknowledgment ceremony, and severability language designed for the actual agreement.
We also litigate both sides of these disputes: enforcing agreements when a spouse tries to escape one, and challenging agreements signed after fraud, coercion, or inequitable conduct. Todd Spodek is a second-generation New York trial lawyer-the same attorney portrayed in Netflix’s Inventing Anna-and matrimonial matters at the firm receive senior-partner attention because the stakes are personal.
