Tagalog Ng Premarital Agreement
Even in countries that have not adopted UPAA/UPMAA such as New York, properly executed marriage contracts have the same presumption of legality as any other treaty.  It is not necessary for a couple who signs a marriage pact to keep separate lawyers to represent him as long as each party understands the agreement and signs it voluntarily with the intention of being bound by its terms. There is a strong public policy that favours parties that control and decide their own interests through contracts.  There are no state or federal laws requiring adults with contractual capacity to hire a lawyer in order to enter into a marriage contract such as a marriage contract, with the exception of a California law that requires the parties to be represented by a lawyer if spousal assistance (support) is limited by the agreement.  The marriage agreement may be challenged if it is proven that the contract was signed under duress.  Whether a pre-marriage contract was signed under duress must be justified by the facts and circumstances of this case. For example, it was found that a spouse`s assertion that she believed there would be no marriage if it was not a marriage, where the marriage was only two weeks away and marriage plans had been made, was not sufficient to demonstrate coercion.  Some federal statutes apply to conditions that may be contained in a premarital contract. The Withdrawal Equity Act (REA) of 1984, signed on August 23, 1984 by President Ronald Reagan, reconciled confusion over whether ERISA anticipated state divorce laws, thereby preventing pension plans from complying with court injunctions granting a spouse a portion of the worker`s pension in a divorce decree.  A matrimonial agreement may include exceptions whererightly agrees to revoke all rights against the other`s pension benefits arising from state and federal marriage laws, as in the context of the REA.
In the past, couples have entered into pre-marriage agreements with some uncertainty as to their validity. Today, the presumed validity and applicability of such agreements is no longer at issue in states that have adopted UPAA/UPMAA, including Florida, Virginia, New Jersey and California.  When a U.S. citizen decides to marry an immigrant, that person often serves as a visa sponsor to ask his fiancée to enter or stay in the United States. The Dept. Homeland Security requires that persons who sponsor their fiance come to the United States on a visa to make a declaration of support and it is important to consider the obligation under oath to support a U.S. sponsor about to sign a pre-married agreement. The Asidavit of Support establishes a 10-year contract between the U.S.
government and the sponsor, which requires the sponsor to financially support the fiancé on its own resources.  As expressly stated on Form I-864, divorce does not end the obligations of assistance owed by the promoter of the U.S. government and the immigrant spouse to rights as a third party beneficiary of the sponsor`s promise of support in the affidavit I-864. As such, any waiver of support must be formulated in their marriage contract in a manner that is not contrary to the treaty that the United States.