On February 18, 2009, Chester County Orphans' Court Judge Katherine B.L. Platt issued an Order and Opinion striking the elective share of a purported surviving spouse to the multi-million dollar estate of a prominent Main Line resident, and upholding the validity of a "pre-cohabitation agreement" signed by the decedent and his live-in girlfriend agreeing not to be married.
The Court decided two questions of first impression in Pennsylvania: (1) what evidence is required to establish the existence of a common law marriage that pre-dates the Pennsylvania legislature's ban on such marriages as of January 1, 2005; and (2) the validity of "pre-cohabitation agreements," where parties agree to live together and not be considered common law spouses.
Lynne D. Gulezian, the live in girlfriend of Alfred Geist Zantzinger for more than two decades, claimed to be the common law wife of Mr. Zantzinger, who died on February 16, 2007. When Mr. Zantzinger died, he left behind a sizeable estate that included properties in Pennsylvania, Canada and South Africa. He bequeathed his estate to Ms. Gulezian and three of his children. Ms. Gulezian, who was unhappy with her share of the estate, filed an election to take against the terms of the will as Mr. Zantzinger's purported surviving spouse. If it was valid, the elective share would have allowed Ms. Gulezian to receive a much larger share of the estate and substantial tax benefits.
Mr. Zantzinger's youngest son, represented by David G. Concannon, Esq., filed a petition to revoke or vacate the elective share. The petition was based, in part, on the existence of an agreement signed by Mr. Zantzinger and Ms. Gulezian in 1983, wherein the parties agreed to live together but not be married, and the fact that Mr. Zantzinger and Ms. Gulezian were never married.
Judge Platt held a three day hearing in August 2008. The two key questions Judge Platt had to decide were whether Ms. Gulezian and Mr. Zantzinger's relationship satisfied the legal elements of a common law marriage, and whether the "pre-cohabitation agreement" signed by Ms. Gulezian and Mr. Zantzinger in 1983 was valid under Pennsylvania law.
During the hearing, Ms. Gulezian, her friends and family, and the caretakers of Mr. Zantzinger's properties in Canada and South Africa, provided testimony in support of the existence of a common law marriage. Ms. Gulezian's claim was opposed by the testimony of Mr. Zantzinger's children, his long time friend and the Executor of his estate, and the caretaker of Mr. Zantzinger's Pennsylvania property.
Ms. Gulezian claimed that the pre-cohabitation agreement was invalid due to fraud and duress, and it should not be enforced because Mr. Zantzinger failed to fully disclose his substantial assets to Ms. Gulezian prior to her signing the agreement. She argued that the pre-cohabitation agreement should be subject to the same legal standards as those governing a prenuptial agreement, where the parties agree to be married but give up certain property rights acquired through marriage. Ms. Gulezian admitted, however, that she hardly read the agreement before signing it. She testified, "I gave it no attention at all . . . I didn't care about it."
After considering all the evidence, the Court decided that Ms. Gulezian failed to prove the existence of a common law marriage by clear and convincing evidence, and the pre-cohabitation agreement signed by the parties was valid and enforceable under Pennsylvania law. The Court rejected Ms. Gulezian's argument that the same standards governing a prenuptial agreement apply to a pre-cohabitation agreement, finding that people who merely agree to live together do not acquire property rights or the same "protected status" as married couples. The Court also rejected Ms. Gulezian's argument that she was fraudulently induced to enter into the agreement, observing: "Disinclination to thoroughly review a contract, given the opportunity to do so, does not rise to the level of duress."
Click here for a copy of the Court's Opinion and Order dated February 18, 2009.
|