Key Takeaways
Prenuptial Agreements Are Recognized Under Maine Law. Maine has adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, 19-A M.R.S. §§ 601-611, which establishes rules governing the creation, content, and enforcement of prenuptial agreements.
A Prenup Must Be Written and Signed. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 603, a premarital agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. Under § 605, the agreement becomes effective upon marriage.
Financial Disclosure Matters. Financial disclosure can become particularly important if a spouse later challenges a prenuptial agreement as unconscionable. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 608, that ground for nonenforcement requires the challenging party to establish that the agreement was unconscionable when executed and that the statutory requirements concerning inadequate disclosure, lack of a written waiver of further disclosure, and inadequate knowledge of the other party’s property or financial obligations are satisfied.
Prenups Can Address More Than Premarital Property. Couples can address property rights, future property, spousal support, estate-planning matters, and what happens to property upon divorce or death.
Children Are Different. A premarital agreement cannot adversely affect a child’s right to support, and parents cannot use a private agreement to prevent a court from protecting a child’s best interests.
Postnuptial Agreements Are Made After Marriage. Couples may also enter financial agreements after marrying, including written amendments to existing prenuptial agreements, but the statutory framework for premarital agreements should not automatically be treated as governing every postnuptial agreement.
Good Drafting Matters. Clearly identifying property, financial expectations, future assets, and the consequences of divorce can prevent disputes over what the parties actually intended.
Introduction
Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements can allow couples in Maine to establish financial expectations rather than leaving financial issues to be resolved only under Maine’s ordinary divorce laws. A prenuptial agreement is made in contemplation of marriage and takes effect when the couple marries. A postnuptial agreement addresses financial rights after the parties are already married.
Despite their reputation, these agreements are not useful only for extremely wealthy couples or people expecting to divorce. A couple may want an agreement because one person owns a business, has children from a prior relationship, expects an inheritance, enters the marriage with substantial assets or debt, or simply wants greater certainty about finances. Married couples may revisit these questions when circumstances change significantly.
The emotional component can be more difficult than the legal one. Asking for a prenup may initially sound like questioning the relationship. A request for a postnuptial agreement can feel even more sensitive because the couple has already married. Yet an agreement can also provide an opportunity to discuss expectations that might otherwise remain unresolved.
The law adds another layer. Maine’s ordinary divorce rules distinguish marital from nonmarital property and authorize courts to divide marital property in proportions they consider just. See 19-A M.R.S. § 953. A valid agreement can significantly change that analysis by defining financial rights before a dispute occurs. Section 953 specifically excludes from marital property property that the spouses have validly agreed to exclude.
Understanding what these agreements can accomplish and what can make them vulnerable to challenges allows couples to approach the subject as financial planning rather than simply preparation for divorce.
Maine Law Governing Prenuptial and Postnuptial Agreements
Maine’s Uniform Premarital Agreement Act
Maine has adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (“UPAA”), codified at 19-A M.R.S. §§ 601-611. The Act defines a premarital agreement as an agreement between prospective spouses made in contemplation of marriage and to be effective upon marriage. 19-A M.R.S. § 602.
The formal requirements are relatively straightforward. Section 603 requires a premarital agreement to be in writing and signed by both parties. It is enforceable without consideration, meaning the parties do not need a separate exchange of money, property, or another benefit to make the agreement enforceable.
A postnuptial agreement differs because the spouses enter into it after marriage. Importantly, Maine’s UPAA expressly governs premarital agreements. It should therefore not be assumed that every statutory provision governing prenups automatically applies to an independently created postnuptial agreement.
There is an important statutory provision when the parties already have a prenup. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 607, after marriage the spouses may amend or revoke their premarital agreement through a written agreement signed by both parties. The amendment or revocation is enforceable without consideration.
What Can a Maine Prenuptial Agreement Cover?
Maine law gives prospective spouses considerable flexibility.
Under 19-A M.R.S. § 604, a premarital agreement may address rights and obligations concerning property, including property acquired before or during marriage. It may establish rights to manage, transfer, mortgage, sell, or otherwise control property and determine what happens to property upon separation, divorce, death, or another specified event.
The parties may also address spousal support, estate-planning arrangements, ownership rights in life-insurance death benefits, and the law governing their agreement. Section 604 additionally permits agreements concerning other matters that do not violate public policy.
These provisions make prenups useful in situations that go well beyond protecting a bank account someone already owns. A business owner might establish how the business and its future appreciation will be treated. A couple might determine how they will handle a home purchased during marriage or distinguish individual and joint investment accounts.
Precision matters, however. In Dow v. Billing, 2020 ME 10, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, considered a premarital agreement that protected property the parties owned when they signed it. The husband argued that the agreement also protected a 401(k) he established during the marriage. The Law Court rejected that interpretation, concluding that the agreement’s language did not extend to the later-created 401(k).
The case illustrates why an agreement should clearly state whether it addresses only property existing when the agreement is signed or also reaches future assets, appreciation, earnings, businesses, retirement accounts, and other property acquired during the marriage.
Voluntariness and Financial Disclosure
Signing an agreement does not necessarily end the inquiry. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 608, a premarital agreement will not be enforced if the party against whom enforcement is sought proves one of the statutory grounds for nonenforcement.
One ground is straightforward: the party did not execute the agreement voluntarily.
The second is more specific. A party may establish that the agreement was unconscionable when executed and, before signing it, the party did not receive fair and reasonable disclosure of the other person’s property or financial obligations, did not voluntarily and expressly waive additional disclosure in writing, and did not have, or reasonably could not have had, adequate knowledge of those finances. The court decides unconscionability as a matter of law.
That structure makes financial disclosure particularly important. Couples preparing an agreement should identify meaningful assets, liabilities, income, business interests, real estate, retirement accounts, and other significant financial interests rather than relying on general statements about their finances.
Timing and process can matter as well, particularly if voluntariness is later disputed. Presenting a complicated agreement immediately before a wedding can create an avoidable dispute about whether it was signed voluntarily. Giving both people meaningful time to review the agreement, exchange financial information, ask questions, negotiate changes, and consult separate counsel can provide stronger evidence of an informed and voluntary process.
What Maine Appellate Decisions Tell Us About Enforceability
Blanchard v. Blanchard, 2016 ME 140, provides an important illustration of how Maine courts evaluate challenges to premarital agreements under the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act. The parties signed their agreement four days before marrying, but the circumstances surrounding the signing mattered. The proposed agreement had been provided approximately six weeks earlier, the wife knew that the drafting attorney represented the husband, she had an opportunity to obtain independent counsel, and she requested substantive changes that were incorporated into the final document.
After a twenty-six-year marriage, the wife challenged the agreement. The Law Court affirmed its enforcement. In discussing unconscionability, the Court considered both the process surrounding execution of the agreement and the substance of its terms. Blanchard demonstrates why the number of days between signing and the wedding does not, by itself, determine enforceability.
An older decision, Hoag v. Dick, 2002 ME 92, provides a useful contrast. There, the proposed agreement was presented on the wedding day, modified that day, reviewed only briefly, and signed shortly before the ceremony. The Law Court affirmed the determination that the agreement was unenforceable. Because the agreement in Hoag predated application of Maine’s Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, the case was decided under the law then applicable rather than the current statutory framework. Even with that limitation, the circumstances illustrate the kinds of last-minute pressures that can create serious disputes about whether an agreement was entered into voluntarily.
Enforceability can also become important outside divorce. In Estate of Martin, 2008 ME 7, the Law Court addressed a premarital agreement after the husband’s death and upheld the agreement against a challenge to its enforceability. The case illustrates that a prenup can have significant consequences for inheritance and estate rights as well as divorce, particularly when one or both spouses have children from prior relationships.
Taken together, these decisions show why the process surrounding a premarital agreement matters. Providing the proposed agreement well before the wedding, making meaningful financial disclosures, allowing time for review and negotiation, and giving each person an opportunity to obtain independent legal advice can create a much stronger record if enforcement is later challenged. None of those considerations should be reduced to a simple rule about how many days before the wedding an agreement must be signed; Maine law establishes no universal minimum waiting period.
Agreements Can Change Maine’s Normal Property Rules
Without a valid agreement altering the result, Maine applies 19-A M.R.S. § 953 when dividing property at divorce. Property acquired during marriage is generally presumed to be marital property regardless of whose name appears on the title, subject to statutory exceptions.
One of those exceptions is property excluded by a valid agreement of the parties. A prenuptial agreement can therefore significantly affect which assets become part of the marital estate subject to division at divorce.
In Laqualia v. Laqualia, 2011 ME 114, the Law Court addressed a premarital agreement that affected both property rights and spousal support. The Court recognized that premarital agreements may determine the disposition of property and modify or eliminate spousal support. It also explained that when a valid premarital agreement excludes property from the marital estate, the divorce court must treat that property as nonmarital and set it apart to the spouse to whom it belongs rather than distribute it to the other spouse as part of the marital estate.
That makes classification language especially important. An agreement should clearly explain what remains nonmarital, what will be treated as marital, and how appreciation, income, contributions, and property acquired during the marriage will be treated.
Agreements Cannot Control Every Family Law Issue
Contractual freedom has limits, particularly when children are involved.
Section 604 of the UPAA expressly provides that a premarital agreement may not adversely affect a child’s right to support. The statute also permits agreements concerning other matters only when they do not violate public policy. Maine’s Law Court has applied that limitation to protect the court’s ability to address a child’s best interests.
In Riemann v. Toland, 2022 ME 13, the Law Court considered a premarital agreement in which the parties had waived the right to seek attorney fees. When the parties later litigated parental rights, the Court concluded that enforcing the waiver could interfere with a party’s ability to litigate issues affecting the child’s best interests. The Law Court held that the attorney-fee waiver was unenforceable as against public policy when the best interests of the child were at issue.
Parents therefore should not view a prenup as a way to predetermine future parental rights, a child’s residence or contact with either parent, or the support a child will receive. Those matters implicate the child’s interests and the court’s responsibility to protect them, not merely the contractual rights of the spouses.
Common Examples
Protecting a Business Owned Before Marriage
Suppose one prospective spouse owns a successful Maine business before the wedding. Both people want the business to remain that person’s separate property if they later divorce.
A prenup can identify the business, establish its treatment, and address issues such as future appreciation, income, or contributions. Simply stating that each person keeps “what they own” may create uncertainty about future growth or property acquired during the marriage. Dow v. Billing demonstrates why precise language concerning future property matters.
A Second Marriage With Children From Prior Relationships
Consider two people marrying in their fifties. Each owns a home, retirement accounts, and investments, and each has adult children from an earlier marriage.
Their concerns may involve both divorce and death. Section 604 allows a prenup to address property disposition and certain estate-planning arrangements. The couple may coordinate the agreement with wills, trusts, beneficiary designations, and other estate-planning documents so that their overall plan works consistently.
One Person Has Significant Debt
Suppose one fiancé enters the marriage with substantial graduate-school and credit-card debt. The other has significant savings and wants clarity about their respective financial responsibilities.
A prenup can identify existing debts and establish financial expectations. The agreement can also address property rights and obligations during marriage and upon divorce. Detailed financial disclosure can create a clearer record of what each person knew before signing.
A Couple Wants to Modify an Existing Prenup
Assume a couple signed a prenup before marriage. Fifteen years later, their finances look completely different, and both agree that some provisions no longer reflect what they want.
Section 607 allows spouses to amend or revoke the existing premarital agreement after marriage through a written agreement signed by both. They should identify precisely which provisions remain effective and which ones change rather than relying on an informal understanding.
A Prenup Arrives Days Before the Wedding
Suppose the wedding is Saturday and one fiancé receives a lengthy proposed agreement on Wednesday. The document contains substantial waivers, and the person has not received complete financial information or had meaningful time to obtain legal advice.
Timing alone does not determine whether an agreement is enforceable. In Blanchard, the parties signed their agreement four days before the wedding, but the proposed agreement had been provided weeks earlier and there had been an opportunity for review and negotiation. By contrast, the older Hoag case involved an agreement presented and signed on the wedding day under very different circumstances.
The broader process matters when voluntariness or unconscionability is disputed. Providing a proposed agreement well in advance, allowing meaningful financial disclosure and review, and providing a genuine opportunity for negotiation and independent legal advice can create a much stronger record surrounding execution.
Fictional Fact Pattern: A Business, a Home, and a Later Amendment
Anna and James are a fictional couple living in Portland, Maine, and preparing to marry. Anna owns a veterinary practice that she started eight years earlier. James works in technology and has substantial retirement savings. Both have been married before, and James has a teenage child from his prior marriage.
Anna’s practice is worth approximately $900,000. She wants to preserve her ownership if the marriage ends, particularly because another veterinarian holds a minority interest in the company. James does not object but wants clarity about what happens if marital funds later support the business or if he reduces his work hours to assume greater responsibilities at home.
Several months before the wedding, they begin discussing a prenuptial agreement. Each provides financial information identifying real estate, investment and retirement accounts, debts, income, and other significant assets. They use separate attorneys during the negotiation.
The resulting agreement identifies Anna’s existing ownership interest in the veterinary practice as her separate property. It also addresses future appreciation and establishes how certain contributions to the business will be treated. James’s premarital retirement savings receive similar treatment.
The agreement separately addresses a house the couple expects to purchase together in Portland. Rather than relying on a general separate-property provision, it establishes how the parties will treat their contributions and ownership interests. The agreement also addresses spousal support and coordinates certain provisions with their estate planning.
Twelve years later, their circumstances have changed considerably. Anna’s practice has expanded, James has spent several years working a reduced schedule, and the couple has accumulated significant additional assets. Both believe the original agreement should change.
Because they already have a premarital agreement, 19-A M.R.S. § 607 provides a mechanism for changing it after marriage. They execute a written amendment signed by both spouses. The amendment changes several financial provisions while expressly confirming the remainder of the original agreement.
Five years later, James files for divorce. A dispute develops over the veterinary practice and the effect of the amendment.
The court would examine the language of the original agreement and amendment to determine what the parties agreed to and whether the disputed provisions are enforceable before determining how Maine’s ordinary property-division rules apply. If James sought to avoid enforcement of the original premarital agreement under 19-A M.R.S. § 608, he would bear the statutory burden of proving a basis for nonenforcement.
The history surrounding execution could also matter. Months of advance review, detailed financial disclosures, separate counsel, negotiation, and a later written amendment signed by both spouses would create an important record concerning the parties’ knowledge, intentions, and the circumstances surrounding their agreements.
The example illustrates the principal value of careful marital planning. The goal is not merely to identify who owned what on the wedding day. A useful agreement anticipates how finances may evolve and provides sufficiently clear rules for a court to understand years later.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are prenuptial agreements enforceable in Maine?
Yes. Maine recognizes prenuptial agreements under the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, 19-A M.R.S. §§ 601-611. A properly executed and enforceable agreement can substantially affect property division and spousal support in a later divorce.
Does a Maine prenup have to be notarized?
Section 603 requires the agreement to be in writing and signed by both parties; the statute does not make notarization a requirement. Other formalities may nevertheless be useful for evidentiary or estate-planning purposes.
Do both people need separate attorneys?
Maine’s UPAA does not state that separate attorneys are an absolute requirement for every valid prenup. Independent legal advice, however, can provide important evidence that each person had a meaningful opportunity to understand and evaluate the agreement before signing it.
How far before the wedding should we sign?
Maine law does not establish a universal number of days. Starting early allows time for financial disclosure, legal review, negotiation, and revisions and can reduce later disputes about pressure surrounding execution.
Can a prenup protect a business?
Yes. A prenup can address rights in existing and future property, including business interests. The agreement should carefully address issues such as appreciation, income, future contributions, and related assets rather than simply naming the business.
Can we waive spousal support?
A Maine prenup may modify or eliminate spousal support under section 604. Section 608 nevertheless provides that if doing so would make one party eligible for public assistance at the time of separation or divorce, a court may require the other party to provide support to the extent necessary to avoid that eligibility.
Can a prenup decide child custody or child support?
A premarital agreement cannot adversely affect a child’s right to support, and private agreements cannot displace the court’s responsibility to protect a child’s best interests. Riemann v. Toland, 2022 ME 13, demonstrates the importance Maine law places on preserving judicial authority over child-related matters.
Can we change our prenup after marriage?
Yes. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 607, spouses can amend or revoke a premarital agreement after marriage through a written agreement signed by both parties.
Is a postnuptial agreement the same as a prenup?
No. A postnuptial agreement is made after marriage, while Maine’s UPAA specifically governs agreements made in contemplation of marriage. An amendment to an existing prenup has an express statutory basis under section 607; other agreements made during marriage may require a different legal analysis.
What happens if a prenup is ambiguous?
Interpretation can become a significant issue in divorce. Dow v. Billing, 2020 ME 10, demonstrates why courts focus closely on the language the parties actually used and why agreements should expressly address future property if that is what the parties intend.
Final Thoughts
Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements can give Maine couples greater control and predictability over financial issues that might otherwise become disputed during divorce or after death. Their usefulness extends well beyond wealthy couples and can include businesses, real estate, retirement accounts, debt, inheritance planning, and spousal support.
The strength of an agreement depends on more than signatures. Clear drafting, meaningful financial disclosure, adequate time for consideration, careful negotiation, and attention to future circumstances can significantly affect whether the agreement accomplishes what the parties intended.
Most importantly, a good agreement should create clarity rather than merely anticipate conflict. Couples cannot predict everything that may happen during a marriage, but they can establish thoughtful financial rules before uncertainty becomes a dispute.
About the Author: Damian Turco is the Founder and Managing Partner of Turco Legal and has practiced divorce and family law since 2008.
Damian Turco’s Bio Page | More Blogs from Damian Turco
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as legal advice. Articles on our blog are written at a historical point in time and the information presented accurately reflects the law at the time of the article’s writing. If you’d like to better understand how the law applies to your case, schedule an attorney consultation by calling any of our offices or by clicking the Schedule a Consultation link on this page.