NEW YORK PRENUP LAW

Prenuptial agreements in New York are governed primarily by Domestic Relations Law §236(B)(3). The statute requires three things for an agreement to be valid and enforceable in a matrimonial action: it must be in writing, subscribed by the parties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded. Beyond these formal requirements, New York courts apply additional standards developed through case law — including review for fraud, duress, unconscionability, and adequate disclosure — that have shaped how prenups are drafted and enforced.

This page explains the statutory framework, the four practical requirements we follow at NYC Prenup to ensure compliance, what New York law allows you to address in a prenup (and what it doesn't), and the leading New York cases that define what makes a prenuptial agreement valid or invalid.

The four requirements for an enforceable New York prenup

Understanding the law is essential to making sure your prenuptial agreement, also known as an antenuptial agreement, is proper and valid. At NYC Prenup, we follow four core practices to ensure compliance with New York law:

Voluntary execution. Both you and your significant other must sign the prenuptial agreement voluntarily. You cannot pressure your spouse into signing the agreement. Courts closely examine the circumstances of signing — particularly the timing relative to the wedding date — when evaluating whether consent was truly voluntary.

Fair and reasonable terms. Your prenup must be fair and reasonable given the circumstances. There is no specific dollar guideline, but if you have millions of dollars and your spouse has no money, you cannot leave your significant other with nothing in the event of separation or divorce. New York courts apply a two-part test: terms must be fair and reasonable when the agreement is signed, and not unconscionable when the agreement is enforced years later.

Full financial disclosure. You and your significant other must be honest with each other and disclose your assets, debts, and income. If you lie about how much money you have, the court may invalidate your prenuptial agreement. A waiver of rights to assets you never knew existed is not a knowing waiver, and courts treat it accordingly.

Opportunity for independent legal review. You and your significant other need the opportunity to have a lawyer review the agreement. This requirement is problematic for many of the discount online prenuptial agreement websites. At NYC Prenup, a lawyer licensed to practice in New York drafts and reviews your agreement before sending it to you. If your significant other wishes to consult a different lawyer, we can arrange a discounted meeting or telephone consultation.

What New York Domestic Relations Law § 236(B)(3) says

New York Domestic Relations Law §236(B)(3) authorizes spouses or prospective spouses to contract out of the elaborate statutory system that would otherwise govern their marriage and divorce. The statute permits couples to provide for matters such as inheritance, distribution or division of property, spousal support, and child custody and care in the event the marriage ends.

Under DRL §236(B)(3), a nuptial agreement made before or during the marriage must satisfy three requirements to be valid and enforceable in a matrimonial action:

The agreement must be in writing. Oral promises, informal email exchanges, and handshake understandings have no effect. Only a written instrument is enforceable as a prenuptial agreement.

It must be subscribed by the parties. Both spouses must sign the agreement. The signatures must be authentic and tied to the document as executed.

It must be acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded. This is the most technical of the three requirements and the one most often missed by template-based prenups. The acknowledgment must comply with New York Real Property Law and use the formal acknowledgment language required for recording a deed. A defective acknowledgment can render an otherwise valid prenup unenforceable, regardless of how clearly the parties intended to be bound.

Beyond the statutory text, New York law defines both "marital property" and "separate property" and provides that, unless there is a duly executed prenuptial agreement, marital property must be equitably distributed and separate property must remain separate. The statute permits parties to either expressly waive or opt out of the statutory scheme governing equitable distribution under DRL §236(B)(5), or to specifically designate as separate property assets that would ordinarily be defined as marital property.

The parties' intent must be clearly evidenced by the writing, but there is no categorical requirement that a prenuptial agreement must set forth an express waiver of equitable distribution. The agreement need only make the parties' intent clear.

What courts will and won't enforce

New York courts may scrutinize agreements between spouses more closely than general business contracts to ensure the agreement was entered into freely and is not unconscionable. Several specific rules limit what a prenup can do:

Spousal maintenance

An agreement concerning the amount and duration of spousal maintenance must be fair and reasonable at the time it is made and not unconscionable at the time of entry of final judgment in the divorce action. Further, no spouse may relieve the other of the requirement of support to the extent that the spouse may become a public charge — that is, a prenup cannot leave one spouse so destitute that they would need to rely on government assistance.

Child support

An agreement as to child support must set forth the amount of child support that would be owed under the relevant Child Support Standards Act guidelines and, if the amount agreed to deviates from the guideline, an explanation of why. Even when the agreement complies with these statutory requirements, the courts retain discretion with respect to child support. The right to child support belongs to the child, and parents cannot bargain it away.

Child custody and visitation

A prenuptial agreement as to child custody is not binding on the court. Nor is an agreement concerning the physical location of a child subject to a joint or shared custody arrangement. Custody and visitation must be decided based on the best interests of the child at the time of any proceeding, not based on what the parents agreed to before the child was born.

Judicial scrutiny: A balanced standard

Despite the limits above, judicial review of separation agreements is to be exercised sparingly, with a goal of encouraging parties to settle their differences on their own. A separation agreement is not per se unconscionable simply because marital assets are divided unequally, because one spouse gave away more than that spouse might have been legally required to do, or because the spouse's decision to approve the agreement might be characterized as unwise. A party seeking to rescind a separation agreement has the burden of showing that the agreement was the result of fraud, duress, or overreaching, or that its terms were unconscionable.

Leading New York prenuptial agreement cases

The following recent New York decisions illustrate how courts evaluate the validity of specific prenups.

Gottlieb v. Gottlieb, 25 N.Y.S.3d 90, 138 A.D.3d 30 (1st Dep't 2016)

The court upheld the prenuptial agreement as valid and enforceable and refused to invalidate the agreement merely because the husband had more than enough assets to give the wife additional funds. The court found that the wife bargained for the benefits she would receive in the event of a divorce and declined to undo the agreement merely because she may, in retrospect, view her choices as having been improvidently made. The court also declined to invalidate the agreement on the grounds that the terms did not match the degree of economic interdependence the parties shared during the marriage. Takeaway: A prenup that favors one spouse is not unenforceable simply because of that imbalance.

Gutherz v. Gutherz, 992 N.Y.S.2d 158 (2d Dep't 2014)

The court found that the wife failed to meet her burden of proof to invalidate the prenuptial agreement. The court held that an alleged failure to disclose assets does not, standing alone, constitute fraud or overreaching sufficient to vitiate an agreement, particularly in the absence of evidence of an attempt to conceal or misrepresent the nature or extent of the assets. The court also declined to set aside the agreement on the basis that the wife had waived spousal maintenance, given that the maintenance provisions were fair and reasonable when executed and at the time of final judgment. Takeaway: Allegations of inadequate disclosure require evidence of actual concealment or misrepresentation — a perfect disclosure is not always required to uphold the agreement.

A.N. v. E.N., 960 N.Y.S.2d 48 (Sup. Ct. 2012)

The court set aside the prenuptial agreement on the grounds of unconscionability, overreaching, and duress during execution. The wife had no input in negotiating the terms, the agreement was entirely one-sided in favor of the husband, there was no bargained-for benefit for the wife, and the terms of the agreement she actually signed were materially different from the terms she believed she was signing. Takeaway: Courts will set aside an agreement when the process of negotiation and execution is fundamentally unfair, especially where one party had no genuine input or was misled about the substance of what they were signing.

E.C.-P. v. P.P., 946 N.Y.S.2d 66 (Sup. Ct. 2011)

The court rescinded the prenuptial agreement where the husband fraudulently induced the wife to sign by promising he would tear up the agreement after they had a child — promises he had no intention of honoring at the time they were made. The wife, due to the nature and extent of the parties' relationship, justifiably placed her trust and confidence in her future husband's representations and was damaged by being denied a share of significant marital property. Takeaway: Fraudulent inducement — false promises made to obtain a signature — is grounds to rescind a prenuptial agreement.

J.M. v. G.V. (Sup. Ct. 2025): maintenance waivers

The most consequential recent development in New York prenuptial agreement law is a January 2025 decision in J.M. v. G.V., 225 N.Y.S.3d 859. The case addressed a question of how properly waive maintenance. The court ruled that a valid waiver of spousal maintenance in a New York prenuptial agreement requires more than a general acknowledgment that the parties are giving up their rights.

Where these rules apply

New York Domestic Relations Law governs the enforcement of prenuptial agreements throughout New York State, including in Kings County (Brooklyn), Queens County, New York County (Manhattan), Bronx County, Richmond County (Staten Island), Nassau County, Suffolk County, and Westchester County. The same statutory and case-law framework applies regardless of where in New York the parties were married or where they reside, so long as a New York court is asked to enforce the agreement.

How NYC Prenup applies these rules

Our agreements are drafted by licensed New York attorneys to comply with Domestic Relations Law §236(B)(3), the formal acknowledgment requirements of New York Real Property Law, and the body of New York case law that defines fair, reasonable, and enforceable prenups.