## Facts

- Kathy G. Garbade and J. Robert Garbade signed a prenuptial agreement a few hours before their wedding.
- At the time, Robert was a wealthy business owner/executive with an alleged net worth of about $2.5 million; Kathy was unemployed and brought no assets to the marriage.
- Robert insisted on a prenuptial agreement and directed his attorneys to prepare it.
- The agreement provided that each spouse waived claims against the other, including maintenance and property rights, and (most relevant here) Kathy waived her right to take an elective share of Robert’s estate at his death.
- The agreement required Robert to maintain a $100,000 life insurance policy for Kathy’s benefit.
- Kathy was advised to obtain independent legal counsel and had time and opportunity to do so.
- Kathy received a detailed disclosure of Robert’s assets before signing.
- Kathy signed the agreement without reading it and without having an attorney review it, later claiming she did not know it waived her elective share.
- Robert died about two years later, survived by Kathy and two sons from a prior marriage.
- The sons served as personal representatives (coadministrators) of Robert’s estate.
- Kathy filed a notice of election to take her elective share under New York’s spousal-election statute (EPTL 5-1.1).
- The sons moved for summary judgment, arguing Kathy waived the right of election in the prenuptial agreement; Kathy opposed, claiming the waiver was invalid due to fraud or other misconduct.

## Issues

1. Whether a surviving spouse who signed a prenuptial agreement waiving the elective share may avoid the waiver by alleging fraud, misrepresentation, duress, imposition, or undue influence.
2. Whether the spouse’s proof raised a triable issue of fact sufficient to defeat summary judgment enforcing the waiver.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed the Surrogate’s Court’s order granting summary judgment to the estate’s representatives.
- The court enforced the prenuptial agreement’s waiver of Kathy’s elective share and upheld the judgment setting aside her notice of election.
- The court held that Kathy did not produce evidence from which fraud, concealment, duress, or undue influence could reasonably be inferred.
- The court treated Kathy’s claim that she signed without reading the agreement as, at most, her own failure to inform herself of its terms, not proof of wrongdoing by the decedent or the estate.

## Legal Principles

- A duly executed antenuptial (prenuptial) agreement is presumed valid and is treated like other contracts; it will be enforced absent proof of fraud.
- The party challenging the agreement bears the burden to come forward with evidence of fraud; fraud will not be presumed without facts supporting a reasonable inference of concealment or deception.
- A waiver of statutory spousal rights, including the elective share, may be enforced when the spouse had asset disclosure and an opportunity to seek independent counsel, even if the spouse chose not to read the agreement or retain counsel.
- On summary judgment, conclusory allegations of fraud, misrepresentation, duress, or undue influence—without supporting evidence—do not create a factual dispute requiring a trial.

## Conclusion

The Third Department enforced the prenuptial elective-share waiver and affirmed summary judgment for the estate because the agreement was duly executed with disclosure and an opportunity for independent counsel, and the surviving spouse’s allegations of fraud or coercion were unsupported by evidence raising a triable issue of fact.


Matter of Estate of Garbade, 221 A.D.2d 844 (1995)