Rosenberg v. Lipnick

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).