Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 3/30/1979

Rosenberg v. Lipnick

Citations

389 N.E.2d 385
377 Mass. 666
1979 Mass. LEXIS 1097

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

abandoning the rule of Wellington v. Rugg, 243 Mass. 30 [1922], that common law fraud must be proved in order to invalidate an antenuptial contract
“The right to make antenuptial agree ments settling property rights in advance of marriage is a valuable personal right which courts should not regulate destructively”
“the reasonableness of any monetary provision in an antenuptial contract cannot ultimately be judged in isolation”
“Thus, in future cases involving agreements drawn after the publication date of this opinion, we shall feel free to [apply the new rule]”
in determining whether to invalidate antenuptial agreement for fraud, citing Goodwin as persuasive authority in support of proposition that duty to disclose may result from relationship of parties
parties to an antenuptial agreement stand in a confidential relationship and “[fjull and fair disclosure of each party’s financial circumstances is a significant aspect of [their] obligation to deal with each other ‘fairly and under standingly ’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hennessey, Quirico, Braucher, Wilkins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

37 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.