Vogt v. Vogt
831 So.2d 428, 2002 WL 31422827 (2002)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A prenuptial agreement establishing post-divorce alimony obligations is a valid and enforceable contract under Louisiana law, provided it does not violate public policy. Such agreements are not considered gratuitous when the marriage itself serves as consideration, nor are they prohibited donations of future property.
Facts:
- Before their marriage, Gregory D. Vogt and Deborah Blancq discussed a prenuptial agreement because Blancq sought financial security.
- Vogt initially offered in writing to pay Blancq 50% of his net income as alimony for life, regardless of fault.
- Blancq consulted an attorney, Robert Lowe, who drafted an agreement reducing the alimony to 20% of Vogt's gross annual income, payable post-divorce unless Blancq committed adultery.
- The agreement also required Vogt to maintain a $500,000 life insurance policy in favor of Blancq as long as alimony was due.
- Vogt was advised to seek independent legal counsel but chose not to, stating he was only interested in marrying Blancq.
- On October 29, 1992, both Vogt and Blancq signed the agreement in the presence of a notary and witnesses.
- The couple married on November 14, 1992, and subsequently had two children.
Procedural Posture:
- Deborah Blancq filed for divorce from Gregory D. Vogt in May 2000.
- In May 2001, Deborah Blancq filed a 'Rule to Show Cause To Enforce Support Provisions of Matrimonial Agreement' in the district court (trial court).
- The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the matter.
- Following the hearing, the trial court granted the Rule, finding the agreement enforceable.
- Gregory D. Vogt, as appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit, with Deborah Blancq as appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a prenuptial agreement that obligates one spouse to pay a fixed percentage of their gross income as post-divorce alimony, contingent on the other spouse's marital fault, violate Louisiana public policy and is it therefore unenforceable for lack of cause or consent?
Opinions:
Majority - Edwards, J.
No, a prenuptial agreement obligating one spouse to pay a fixed percentage of income as alimony, contingent on the other's marital fault, does not violate Louisiana public policy and is enforceable. The court reasoned that under LSA-C.C. Art. 2329, spouses may enter into matrimonial agreements on matters not prohibited by public policy. Citing McAlpine v. McAlpine, the court found that permanent alimony is a law enacted to protect individuals, not the public interest, and thus its terms can be contractually defined. The agreement was not gratuitous, as the marriage itself and the limitation of Vogt's potential alimony liability to a set percentage served as valid consideration or cause. The court rejected Vogt's claim of not reading the contract, stating a person is presumed to know the contents of what they sign, and found no evidence of fraud, duress, or any other vice of consent.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the Louisiana Supreme Court's holding in McAlpine by extending the principle that parties can contractually waive permanent alimony to also allow them to affirmatively set the terms of permanent alimony. It clarifies that such agreements are governed by the general rules of conventional obligations and will be upheld as long as they do not derogate from laws enacted for the public interest. The case underscores the enforceability of prenuptial agreements that provide financial certainty, treating the marriage itself and the mutual setting of terms as valid consideration for the contract's obligations.
Unlock the full brief for Vogt v. Vogt