No. Georgia places the burden of financial disclosure on the spouse who wants a prenuptial agreement enforced, not on the spouse asked to sign it.
The Duty Is to Inform, Not to Inquire
In Blige v. Blige, 283 Ga. 65 (2008), the Georgia Supreme Court adopted the rule that “the burden is not on either party to inquire, but on each to inform, for it is only by requiring full disclosure of the amount, character, and value of the parties’ respective assets that courts can ensure intelligent waiver of the statutory (and other) rights involved.” The Court explained that if a spouse has a duty to disclose, “we would eviscerate and render meaningless that duty if we imposed upon the other spouse a duty to investigate.”
How That Plays Out
In Kwon v. Kwon, 333 Ga. App. 130 (2015), a husband died and his estate tried to enforce an antenuptial agreement that failed to list his interests in two companies. The Court of Appeals held the agreement unenforceable, stating plainly that “Mrs. Kwon had no duty to investigate Mr. Kwon’s assets before she signed the antenuptial agreement.”
An Argument Georgia Courts Have Rejected
Spouses seeking enforcement have repeatedly pointed to language in Mallen v. Mallen, 280 Ga. 43 (2005), arguing it created a general duty to inquire into a fiance’s finances. Blige rejected that reading, holding it “turns Scherer’s disclosure requirement on its head.” Dodson v. Dodson, 298 Ga. 117 (2015), rejected it again, confirming that “in the absence of a full and fair disclosure, the other spouse does not have a general duty to investigate the assets of the other party.”
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!