Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 3/19/2003

Stoner v. Stoner

Citations

819 A.2d 529
572 Pa. 665
2003 Pa. LEXIS 411

How courts have described this case

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

noting that per se requirement of consultation with independent legal counsel “would be a paternalistic and unwarranted interference with the parties’ freedom to contract”
explaining that “traditional contract rules should be applied to marriage agreements”
reaffirming “the principle in Simeone that full disclosure of the parties’ financial resources is a mandatory requirement”
reaffirming “the principle in Simeone that full disclosure of the parties’ financial resources is a mandatory requirement”
former paternalistic approach to evaluating marriage contracts ignored; parties have the right to freely contract
expressly rejecting “an approach which would allow the court to inquire into the reasonableness of the bargain,” and endorsing the parties’ rights to freely contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin, Lamb

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.