J.M. v. G.V.: A Landmark 2025 Decision on Prenuptial Agreement Waivers

In January 2025, a Kings County decision in J.M. v. G.V. sent ripples through the matrimonial law community in New York. This case addresses a longstanding tension in prenuptial agreement law: how much can couples waive regarding spousal maintenance, and under what conditions is such a waiver enforceable?

For anyone considering a prenuptial agreement—or for couples already bound by one—this decision represents a meaningful shift in how courts evaluate maintenance waivers. It’s a decision that could affect your rights, obligations, and financial security. Let’s break down what the court decided, why it matters, and what it means for prenuptial agreements going forward.

Background: The Prenuptial Maintenance Waiver Debate

Before diving into the specifics of J.M. v. G.V., it’s helpful to understand the broader legal landscape.

What Is a Maintenance Waiver?

When couples sign prenuptial agreements, they often include provisions about spousal maintenance (alimony). These provisions might specify the amount of maintenance to be paid, establish the duration of maintenance obligations, or state that neither party waives the right to maintenance entirely. Historically, some couples have tried to include complete waivers—essentially saying, “Neither party will owe maintenance to the other under any circumstances.”

The Legal Question

New York courts have generally enforced prenuptial agreements, but they’ve also been cautious about allowing couples to completely waive statutory protections. The question that has loomed over prenuptial practice is: To what extent can couples agree in advance that they won’t owe maintenance to each other, even if circumstances change dramatically?

For example: Can a couple agree that neither will owe maintenance, even if one party becomes extremely wealthy and the other becomes unemployed or disabled?

The J.M. v. G.V. Decision

The Kings County court in J.M. v. G.V. addressed this question by establishing new, stricter standards for prenuptial maintenance waivers.

The “Knowing” Standard

The court held that a maintenance waiver in a prenuptial agreement is only enforceable if both parties entered into it with a “knowing” understanding of what they were waiving. This is a higher standard than mere consent.

A “knowing” waiver requires several elements. First, there must be clear disclosure of the statutory maintenance guidelines and what those guidelines would require in the parties’ specific circumstances. Second, both parties must demonstrate understanding of what maintenance obligations they were relinquishing. Third, there must be evidence that both parties understood the potential financial consequences of the waiver going forward. Fourth, the prenuptial agreement must contain clear language that explicitly identifies the waiver rather than vague references.

The court emphasized that vague references to “waiving maintenance” don’t meet this standard. Instead, the prenuptial agreement should specifically address what waiver means, how it relates to the statutory guidelines, and what circumstances might have triggered maintenance obligations had the waiver not been in place.

Statutory Calculation Requirements

The court also held that prenuptial maintenance agreements must reference or incorporate the statutory maintenance calculations that would otherwise apply under New York law.

Why does this matter? Because it ensures that both parties understand what they’re actually waiving. If the prenuptial simply says “neither party waives maintenance,” without connecting that waiver to the specific statutory formulas, courts may decline to enforce it.

In other words, a prenuptial should essentially show the math. It might say something like: “Notwithstanding New York’s statutory maintenance guidelines, which would calculate maintenance as [specific formula], the parties agree to waive maintenance obligations entirely.”

This connects the abstract concept of “maintenance waiver” to the concrete calculations couples would otherwise be subject to.

Why This Decision Matters

J.M. v. G.V. represents a significant shift in prenuptial law. Here’s why it’s important:

1. Stricter Enforcement Standard for Waivers

Previously, some courts were relatively permissive about prenuptial maintenance waivers. If a couple clearly stated they didn’t want to owe maintenance, courts generally enforced it without much scrutiny.

The J.M. v. G.V. decision raises the bar. Courts will now look more carefully at whether the waiver was truly “knowing”—meaning whether both parties genuinely understood what they were giving up.

2. Increased Attention to Disclosure

The decision emphasizes that full financial disclosure is essential for an enforceable maintenance waiver. If one party didn’t know the other’s income, earning potential, or assets when signing the prenuptial, the waiver might not hold up.

This places greater responsibility on both parties and their attorneys to ensure that prenuptials include detailed financial disclosures.

3. Plain Language Requirements

The decision suggests that prenuptials should include explicit language addressing maintenance waivers, not just incorporate them by reference. This means drafting prenuptials has become more detailed and specific.

A clause that simply references “the statutory maintenance guidelines” without further explanation may not satisfy the “knowing” standard established in J.M. v. G.V.

4. Implications for “Entire Agreement” Clauses

Many prenuptials include sweeping “entire agreement” clauses that essentially say: “This agreement covers all financial matters between us, and this is the complete deal.”

The J.M. v. G.V. court questioned whether such broad clauses constitute the kind of specific, “knowing” waiver the court requires. This could affect how courts interpret existing prenuptials.

What This Means for Couples with Existing Prenuptials

If you signed a prenuptial agreement before 2025, you might be wondering: Does this decision affect my agreement?

The answer depends on several factors:

If Your Prenuptial Is Specific About Maintenance

If your prenuptial specifically addresses maintenance—defining what you’re waiving and why—the J.M. v. G.V. decision may not significantly affect enforceability. Your agreement likely meets the new “knowing” standard.

If Your Prenuptial Is Vague

If your prenuptial simply states that neither party waives maintenance, or if it doesn’t reference the statutory guidelines, the decision creates uncertainty. If you ended up in a divorce, a judge might apply the new “knowing” standard and potentially decline to enforce the maintenance waiver.

If You Want to Update Your Prenuptial

Some couples with older prenuptials are considering whether to update them in light of J.M. v. G.V. This is often a good idea, particularly if: - Your prenuptial is 10+ years old - Your financial circumstances have changed significantly - Your prenuptial contains vague maintenance language

Updating your prenuptial (through an amendment or new postnuptial agreement) can ensure it meets the new standards and clarifies your actual intentions.

Drafting Prenuptials After J.M. v. G.V.

For couples now considering prenuptial agreements, the J.M. v. G.V. decision changes best practices:

1. Explicit Maintenance Provisions

New prenuptials should include clear, specific language addressing maintenance. Rather than a generic waiver, the agreement should state something like:

“The parties acknowledge that, absent this prenuptial agreement, New York law would entitle [Party A] to receive maintenance from [Party B] calculated as follows: [insert statutory formula]. The parties, with full understanding of this entitlement, agree to waive this right to maintenance entirely.”

2. Detailed Financial Disclosures

Prenuptials should include comprehensive financial schedules showing each party’s assets, liabilities, income, and earning potential. The more detailed the disclosure, the more credible the claim that the waiver was “knowing.”

3. References to Statutory Guidelines

Prenuptials should explicitly reference New York’s statutory maintenance guidelines (currently found in DRL Section 236). This creates a clear connection between the abstract concept of “maintenance” and the specific calculations the parties are addressing.

4. Documentation of Understanding

Some practitioners now recommend including language confirming that each party received independent legal advice and that they understood the terms of the maintenance waiver. This documentation strengthens the “knowing” standard.

5. Clear Statement of Intent

The prenuptial should include a clear statement about what the parties intend. For example:

“The parties intend that this prenuptial agreement will govern all financial matters between them, including but not limited to the distribution of property and the payment or non-payment of spousal maintenance, in the event of divorce or separation.”

Broader Implications: What About Other Waivers?

While J.M. v. G.V. specifically addresses maintenance waivers, the reasoning could extend to other prenuptial provisions:

Property Division Waivers

Could courts apply the same “knowing” standard to waivers of property division rights? Potentially. This might mean that prenuptials addressing equitable distribution should also be specific and reference statutory guidelines.

Custody and Child Support

Courts have long held that couples cannot waive child support obligations in prenuptial agreements, as these involve the rights of children. The J.M. v. G.V. decision doesn’t change this, but it reinforces that statutory protections are fundamental.

Health Insurance and Other Benefits

Some prenuptials address health insurance, retirement benefits, and other financial matters. The “knowing” standard might eventually apply to these provisions as well, though J.M. v. G.V. doesn’t directly address them.

Practical Guidance for Couples

If you’re considering a prenuptial agreement in light of J.M. v. G.V.:

1. Work with an experienced attorney. Not all matrimonial attorneys are equally current on recent case law. Ensure your attorney is familiar with J.M. v. G.V. and understands its implications for your specific situation.

2. Be specific, not vague. Avoid broad language like “neither party waives maintenance.” Instead, specifically address what maintenance waiver means in your context.

3. Get independent legal advice. Each party should have separate legal counsel. This strengthens the claim that any waiver was “knowing.”

4. Document your understanding. Include language in the prenuptial confirming that both parties understand the statutory guidelines and what they’re waiving.

5. Update older prenuptials. If your existing prenuptial is vague about maintenance, consider updating it through an amendment or new postnuptial agreement.

The Bottom Line

J.M. v. G.V. represents a meaningful shift toward stricter scrutiny of prenuptial maintenance waivers. Courts now require that waivers be “knowing”—meaning both parties must demonstrate genuine understanding of what they’re giving up.

This change makes prenuptials both more complicated to draft and more likely to be enforceable if done correctly. The key is specificity: clearly address the statutory guidelines, document that both parties understood the implications, and ensure both parties received independent legal advice.

For couples contemplating or already bound by prenuptial agreements, this decision is significant. It heightens the importance of working with experienced matrimonial counsel to ensure that your prenuptial clearly reflects your intentions and meets the new, stricter standards for enforceability.

---

Ensure Your Prenuptial Meets Current Legal Standards

At Neuhaus & Yacoob LLC, we stay current on the latest developments in matrimonial law, including landmark decisions like J.M. v. G.V. Our team helps couples draft prenuptial and postnuptial agreements that are both specific and enforceable, ensuring that your financial interests are clearly protected.

Whether you’re considering your first prenuptial, updating an existing agreement, or navigating the implications of recent case law, we’re here to provide experienced guidance.

We serve couples throughout New York and New Jersey. Contact us today for a consultation about your prenuptial agreement.

Schedule Your Consultation