Search Tips

Sailer v. Sailer

Docket No. 20080114
Oral Argument: Thursday, January 22, 2009 2:45pm

Docket Info

Title
Curtis L. Sailer, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Sandra K. Sailer, Defendant and Appellant
Case Type
CIVIL APPEAL : CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Appeal From
Case No. 06-C-02214
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Thomas J. Schneider
2009 ND 73764 N.W.2d 445
Oral Argument 1/22/2009

Highlight

A premarital agreement is not enforceable if it was not executed voluntarily; however, the party against whom enforcement is sought has the burden to prove it was not executed voluntarily.
In a premarital agreement, parties may contract to keep their property separate. If one spouse uses his or her earnings to support the other, such fact does not, alone, indicate he or she voluntarily waived the enforceability of the premarital agreement.
Section 14-03.1-06(2), N.D.C.C., does not preclude enforcement of a premarital agreement if a party does not prove that enforcement of the premarital agreement would cause him or her to be eligible for public assistance.
When a trial court discusses whether a premarital agreement is clearly unconscionable, its analysis requires complete factual findings about the parties' relative property values, the other resources, and forseeable needs of the spouse asserting the premarital agreement is unconscionable.
A trial court is required to determine the total value of the marital estate in order to make an equitable division of property.


Briefs

Filing Date Description
10/22/2008 APPELLANT BRIEF View
11/24/2008 APPELLEE BRIEF View

Counsel

Party Type Name
APPELLEE PRIVATE PRACTICE Gregory Ian Runge - 04724

(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)

Seq. # Filing Date Description Attachment
1 05/19/2008 NOTICE OF APPEAL : 05/16/2008
2 05/19/2008 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 05/16/2008
3 05/28/2008 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (and Request for Payment - Jane Hoekstra Ct. Reporter) : 07/05/2008
4 06/30/2008 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT
5 06/30/2008 ACTION BY TRIAL COURT - Granted : 08/13/2008
6 08/13/2008 TRANSCRIPTS DATED December 20, 2007 (v.1) and December 21, 2007 (v.2)
7 08/13/2008 DISK (TRA 12-20-07 & 12-21-07) (e-mailed)
8 08/19/2008 RECORD ON APPEAL & Exhibits (Not rec'd: Pls. Exhs.5 & 6 of Entry #32; Pls. Exh.25 of Entry No. 80;
9 08/19/2008 and Entry No. 51 -- Steno Notes)
10 09/15/2008 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (e-filed)
11 09/15/2008 E-FILED MOTION (Mot/Ext/ATB)
12 09/15/2008 ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK - Granted : 10/22/2008
13 10/20/2008 MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD (FAXED)
14 10/20/2008 E-FILED MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD (FAXED)
15 10/21/2008 NO ACTION TAKEN (MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD).
16 10/22/2008 APPELLANT BRIEF View
17 10/22/2008 E-FILED BRIEF - ATB
18 10/22/2008 APPELLANT APPENDIX
19 10/22/2008 E-FILED APPENDIX - ATA
20 10/23/2008 Received $25 Surcharge for Appellant Brief (Receipt 18289)
21 10/24/2008 Received 7 copies of ATB from Central Duplicating.
22 10/24/2008 Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating.
23 10/27/2008 Corrected TOC & pages 83 through 89 for ATA
24 11/24/2008 APPELLEE BRIEF View
25 11/24/2008 DISK - AEB (CD-ROM)
26 01/22/2009 APPEARANCES: Kent M. Morrow; Gregory I. Runge
27 01/22/2009 ARGUED:Morrow;Runge
28 01/22/2009 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
29 04/30/2009 DISPOSITION (AND REMANDED)
30 04/30/2009 SPLIT OPINION : Kapsner, Carol Ronning View
31 04/30/2009 (DISSENTING) : Maring, Mary Muehlen
32 04/30/2009 Neither party have and recover costs and disbursements on this appeal under Rule 39, N.D.R.App.P.
33 05/04/2009 Judgment Mailed to Parties
34 05/27/2009 MANDATE
35 06/02/2009 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE
36 01/10/2020 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed