“Marital settlement agreements are made to settle the issues between spouses who are contemplating obtaining a judgment of legal separation, dissolution, or nullity. When the marital relationship has irreparably broken down, a marital settlement agreement is not barred by the public policy against agreements promoting marital dissolution. [Hill v. Hill, 23 Cal. 2d 82, 142 P.2d 417 (1943); see Glickman v. Collins, 13 Cal. 3d 852, 120 Cal. Rptr. 76, 533 P.2d 204, 93 A.L.R.3d 513 (1975); for discussion of the public policy against agreements promoting marital dissolution]”
“A marital settlement agreement commonly provides, among other things, for a division of community assets and debts, and for child and spousal support. [In re Marriage of Lynn, 101 Cal. App. 4th 120, 123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 611 (5th Dist. 2002)] Among the issues commonly addressed in marital settlement agreements are the following: (1) characterization and division of the parties’ property and debts, including any reimbursement claims a spouse has against the community; (2) child custody and visitation; (3) payment of and security for child and spousal support; (4) payment of income taxes; (5) payment of attorney’s fees and costs; and (6) enforcement and modification of the agreement.”
“The formulation of a marital settlement agreement is not an ordinary business transaction, resulting from an arm’s-length negotiation between adversaries; rather, it is the result of negotiations between fiduciaries required to openly share information. [In re Marriage of Georgiou and Leslie, 218 Cal. App. 4th 561, 160 Cal. Rptr. 3d 254 (4th Dist. 2013)”
“Although a written agreement is not strictly required, it is a practical necessity for purposes of clarity and enforceability. Furthermore, in addition to the general statute of frauds requirement that an agreement which cannot be performed within a year or during the promisor’s lifetime must be in writing [Civ. Code, § 1624], certain provisions of marital settlement agreements are statutorily required to be in writing [see, for example, Fam. Code, § 3580 (agreements for immediate separation, including child and spousal support provisions, must be in writing); Fam. Code, § 852, subd. (a) (agreements for the transmutation of property after 1984 must be in writing)]. In the absence of fraud or other invalidity, the property provisions of a marital settlement agreement (MSA) are valid and binding on the court. [Litke O’Farrell, LLC v. Tipton, 204 Cal. App. 4th 1178, 139 Cal. Rptr. 3d 548 (1st Dist. 2012)]”
“A marital settlement agreement cannot abridge the court’s ability to act on behalf of the parties’ children, either by attempting to terminate the court’s power directly, or by precluding attorney’s fees that may be needed to institute or defend subsequent proceedings regarding child custody or support orders. Such provisions are invalid, and the court retains jurisdiction over these issues to act in the children’s best interest. [In re Marriage of Joseph, 217 Cal. App. 3d 1277, 266 Cal. Rptr. 548 (1st Dist. 1990)]”
“In general, before or at the time the parties enter into an agreement for the resolution of property or support issues other than pendente lite support or, if the case goes to trial, no later than 45 days before the first assigned trial date, each party must serve on the other party a final declaration of disclosure and a current income and expense declaration, executed under penalty of perjury on a form prescribed by the Judicial Council. [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (a); see Fam. Code, § 2113]
The parties may mutually waive the final declaration of disclosure. [Fam. Code, § 2105, subds. (a), (d)] The parties may stipulate to a mutual waiver of the requirements of Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (a) concerning the final declaration of disclosure, by execution of a waiver under penalty of perjury entered into in open court or by separate stipulation. The waiver shall include all of the following representations [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)]: (1) both parties have complied with Fam. Code, § 2104 and the preliminary declarations of disclosure have been completed and exchanged [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)(1)]; (2) both parties have completed and exchanged a current income and expense declaration, that includes all material facts and information regarding that party’s earnings, accumulations, and expenses [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)(2)]; (3) both parties have fully complied with Fam. Code § 2102 and have fully augmented the preliminary declarations of disclosure, including disclosure of all material facts and information regarding the characterization of all assets and liabilities, the valuation of all assets that are contended to be community property or in which it is contended the community has an interest, and the amounts of all obligations that are contended to be community obligations or for which it is contended the community has liability [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)(3)]; (4) the waiver is knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered into by each of the parties [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)(4)]; and (5) each party understands that this waiver does not limit the legal disclosure obligations of the parties, but rather is a statement under penalty of perjury that those obligations have been fulfilled. Each party further understands that noncompliance with those obligations will result in the court setting aside the judgment. [Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (d)(5)] [Absent a waiver of the declaration of disclosure under Fam. Code § 2105, subd. (d), a court cannot, absent good cause, enter judgment with respect to the parties’ property rights until each party has executed and served a copy of the final declaration of disclosure and current income and expense declaration. [See Fam. Code, § 2106] The final declaration of disclosure must include all material facts and information regarding the [see Fam. Code, § 2105, subd. (b)]: (1) characterization of all assets and liabilities; (2) valuation of all assets contended to be community property or in which it is contended the community has an interest; (3) amounts of all obligations contended to be community obligations or for which it is contended the community has liability; and (4) earnings, accumulations, and expenses of each party that have been set forth in the income and expense declaration.]”
“A written marital settlement agreement (or an oral stipulation before the court) may be enforced while the proceedings are pending by moving under Code Civ Proc. § 664.6 for entry of judgment pursuant to the terms of the agreement. At the hearing on the motion, the court may determine disputed factual issues, including whether the parties reached a binding settlement of all or part of the case. Interpretation of the agreement is governed by the legal principles applicable to contracts generally. [In re Marriage of Hasso, 229 Cal. App. 3d 1174, 280 Cal. Rptr. 919 (1st Dist. 1991)]”
“A marital settlement agreement that is merely approved by the court as being fair and equitable is enforceable in an action for breach of contract. However, if the agreement is merged into the judgment, the agreement is superseded by the judgment and can be enforced only as a judgment, and not as a contract. [In re Marriage of Lane, 165 Cal. App. 3d 1143, 211 Cal. Rptr. 262 (4th Dist. 1985); see also In re Marriage of Lynn, 101 Cal. App. 4th 120, 123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 611 (5th Dist. 2002) (noting that a marital settlement agreement is usually merged into the judgment of dissolution, whereupon it ceases to have any independent legal significance; the parties’ rights and obligations are governed by the judgment alone); see also In re Marriage of Corona, 172 Cal. App. 4th 1205, 92 Cal. Rptr. 3d 17 (4th Dist. 2009) (holding that a marital settlement agreement (MSA) was merged into the final judgment in the spouses’ dissolution action, and thus its obligations were no longer those imposed by contract and were not enforceable as such, where the MSA was attached to and explicitly incorporated by reference in the supplemental judgment; therefore, former spouses were not subject to any implied covenant or duty of good faith and fair dealing under the terms of a MSA merged into the final judgment in their dissolution action, because the obligations under the terms of the MSA were no longer imposed by contract)]”
[California Civil Practice Family Law Litigation [certain citations omitted]]
