Olson v. Olson

Citations

• 2024 ND 224

Syllabus

A party had access to an attorney under N.D.C.C. § 14-03.2-08 when the party was made aware of the need for a premarital agreement long before the wedding. A party received adequate financial disclosure under N.D.C.C. § 14-03.208 when the party observed the other party's day-to-day involvement connected to the other party's assets and had the opportunity to review balance sheets. A party's consent is voluntary and not the result of duress when the party has the knowledge and experience to understand the contents of a premarital agreement and had been aware of the need for an agreement. A party arguing a premarital agreement is substantively unconscionable must argue a term of the agreement is substantively unconscionable. This Court reviews a district court's decision to allow an undisclosed witness to testify under an abuse of discretion standard. Although the sequestration rule applies to rebuttal witnesses, a district court has discretion to allow a rebuttal witness to testify when the testimony is not negatively influenced by or inappropriately tailored to prior testimony.