Biliouris v. Biliouris
Court of Appeals of Massachusetts
852 N.E.2d 687 (2006)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Timothy Biliouris (plaintiff) filed a petition for divorce from his wife, Mary Biliouris (defendant). At trial, Timothy submitted into evidence the antenuptial agreement that the Biliourises had executed prior to their marriage. The agreement provided that the individual property of each spouse would remain his or her exclusive property and that neither spouse would make a claim to alimony from the other. Mary argued that she had signed the agreement under duress and testified that Timothy had demanded that Mary sign the agreement or else he would not marry her. Mary asserted that the agreement was not negotiable. Against the advice of her attorney, Mary signed the antenuptial agreement in the presence of a notary public, while acknowledging that she did so as her free act and deed. The agreement contained exhibits listing the Biliourises’ assets. Timothy’s assets were worth approximately $1,000,000. Mary’s assets totaled approximately $100,000. A medical-office building was purchased during the marriage. After the trial, the court found that the agreement was enforceable, free from fraud, and entered into voluntarily by both Timothy and Mary after each consulted with an attorney. The trial court granted the judgment of divorce, divided the assets pursuant to the terms of the agreement, determined that the medical office building was the sole property of Timothy, and awarded child support. Additionally, the court awarded Mary an equity interest in the new home that the Biliourises had purchased during the marriage. Mary appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.