PrenupsAI

Evidence-package comparison

Arizona vs. Colorado

Arizona uses a premarital-agreement statute centered on writing, permitted subjects, and execution-time enforcement, while Colorado's newer framework separately covers premarital and marital agreements, access to counsel, and state-specific unenforceable terms.A.R.S. § 25-202(A)A.R.S. § 25-202(C)(1)C.R.S. § 14-2-306C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(a)

AZ

Arizona

Arizona Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, A.R.S. §§ 25-201–205, with section-level records for formation, effectiveness, enforcement, disclosure, support, permitted subjects, amendment, void marriage, and limitations.

Tier
section verified
Authorities
10
Reviewed
2026-07-20
Open full state guide →
CO

Colorado

Colorado Uniform Premarital and Marital Agreements Act, C.R.S. §§ 14-2-301–313, with current sections, enactment history, and qualified appellate interpretations.

Tier
section verified
Authorities
16
Reviewed
2026-07-22
Open full state guide →

Side-by-side source map

What each package says

A blank topic is intentionally visible. The page never fills an uncatalogued state-law rule from general model knowledge.

formalities

Arizona
A.R.S. § 25-202(A)

An Arizona premarital agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties and is enforceable without consideration.

A.R.S. § 25-202(A)
Colorado
C.R.S. § 14-2-306

An agreement must be in a record and signed by both parties and is enforceable without consideration.

C.R.S. § 14-2-306

voluntariness

Arizona
A.R.S. § 25-202(C)(1)

The party resisting enforcement may prove that the agreement was not executed voluntarily.

A.R.S. § 25-202(C)(1)
Colorado
C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(a)

An agreement is unenforceable if the resisting party proves consent was involuntary or resulted from duress.

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(a)

independent counsel

Arizona
No dedicated record

The current Arizona package does not encode this as a standalone source topic. That is a research gap, not a legal conclusion.

Colorado
C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(b), (2)

Access requires reasonable time to decide, locate counsel, obtain and consider advice, plus financial ability or paid reasonable fees when the other party is represented.

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(b), (2)
C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(c), (3)

Unless represented at signing, a party must receive the prescribed conspicuous notice or a plain-language explanation of modified or waived rights.

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(c), (3)

limitations

Arizona
A.R.S. § 25-205

An applicable limitations period for relief under a premarital agreement is tolled during marriage, while equitable defenses including laches and estoppel remain available.

A.R.S. § 25-205
Colorado
C.R.S. §§ 14-2-311–313; 2013 Colo. Sess. Laws ch. 239

Colorado tolls limitations during marriage, preserves laches and estoppel, directs uniform construction, and limits E-SIGN preemption; HB 13-1204 took effect July 1, 2014.

C.R.S. §§ 14-2-311–313; 2013 Colo. Sess. Laws ch. 239

Questions before comparing outcomes

What counsel should establish first

  1. 01

    Which state's law governs each disputed issue, and is the agreement's choice-of-law clause effective?

  2. 02

    Where did the parties live, sign, marry, own property, and expect to perform the agreement?

  3. 03

    Which current statutes and later cases are absent from either source-catalogued package?

  4. 04

    What execution, counsel, disclosure, waiver, and financial-knowledge evidence can actually be proved?

Every source used on this page

Comparison authorities

The complete state guides contain additional authorities and limitations beyond this focused comparison.

formalitiesstatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(A)

Arizona writing and signature requirements

An Arizona premarital agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties and is enforceable without consideration.

  • The record should preserve the complete signed agreement and every incorporated schedule.
effective datestatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(B)

Arizona effective date

An Arizona premarital agreement becomes effective on the parties' marriage.

  • The marriage event and agreement execution date should be distinguished in the factual timeline.
voluntarinessstatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(C)(1)

Arizona voluntary-execution safeguard

The party resisting enforcement may prove that the agreement was not executed voluntarily.

  • Draft history, negotiation timing, communications, counsel records, and signing circumstances can be relevant evidence for counsel to assess.
financial disclosurestatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(C)(2)

Arizona disclosure and knowledge safeguard

For the statutory unconscionability ground, Arizona also examines fair and reasonable disclosure, written waiver of further disclosure, and adequate knowledge of the other party's property or obligations.

  • Section 25-202(C)(2) should be read as a complete test; a checklist does not decide whether its elements are met.
public assistancestatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(D)

Arizona public-assistance support safeguard

A court may require support to the extent necessary to avoid public-assistance eligibility caused by a premarital support modification or elimination.

  • The statute frames this safeguard at separation or marital dissolution.
void marriagestatute

A.R.S. § 25-202(F)

Arizona void-marriage rule

If a marriage is determined to be void, an otherwise premarital agreement is enforceable only to the extent necessary to avoid an inequitable result.

  • This provision does not itself predict what relief a court would find necessary.
permitted subjectsstatute

A.R.S. § 25-203(A)

Arizona permitted agreement subjects

Arizona lists property rights and management, disposition, spousal support, estate planning, insurance, choice of law, and other lawful personal rights and obligations as permitted subjects.

  • Other matters remain limited by public policy and statutes imposing criminal penalties.
child supportstatute

A.R.S. § 25-203(B)

Arizona child-support limitation

An Arizona premarital agreement may not adversely affect a child's right to support.

  • Child-related language requires separate review rather than treatment as an ordinary contractual allocation.
amendment revocationstatute

A.R.S. § 25-204

Arizona amendment and revocation formalities

After marriage, an Arizona premarital agreement may be amended or revoked only by a written agreement signed by the parties.

  • The amendment or revocation is enforceable without consideration.
limitationsstatute

A.R.S. § 25-205

Arizona limitation-of-actions rule

An applicable limitations period for relief under a premarital agreement is tolled during marriage, while equitable defenses including laches and estoppel remain available.

  • Contract language should not be assumed to displace the statutory tolling rule or equitable defenses.
propertystatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-302

Colorado definitions

Colorado defines premarital and marital agreements, amendment, marital rights, property, records, and signatures, including electronic records and signatures.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
effective datestatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-303

Colorado scope and applicability

The current part applies to agreements signed on or after July 1, 2014 and preserves rights under earlier agreements.

  • The part excludes specified court-approval and anticipated-or-pending dissolution agreements.
permitted subjectsstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-304

Colorado governing-law rule

Chosen law requires a significant relationship at signing and no conflict with section 14-2-309 or fundamental Colorado public policy.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
formalitiesstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-306

Colorado signed-record requirement

An agreement must be in a record and signed by both parties and is enforceable without consideration.

  • Electronic records and signatures can qualify, but the complete record must be preserved.
permitted subjectsstatute

C.R.S. §§ 14-2-302(4)–(5), 14-2-310

Colorado agreement scope and limits

Colorado permits modification of defined marital rights but bars specified child, domestic-violence, dissolution-penalty, and public-policy terms.

  • Custodial-responsibility terms are not binding on the court.
effective datestatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-307

Colorado agreement effectiveness

A premarital agreement takes effect on marriage; a marital agreement takes effect when both parties sign.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
void marriagestatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-308

Colorado void-marriage rule

For a void marriage, a premarital agreement is enforceable only as necessary to avoid an inequitable result.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
voluntarinessstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(a)

Colorado voluntariness and duress

An agreement is unenforceable if the resisting party proves consent was involuntary or resulted from duress.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
independent counselstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(b), (2)

Colorado access to independent representation

Access requires reasonable time to decide, locate counsel, obtain and consider advice, plus financial ability or paid reasonable fees when the other party is represented.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
independent counselstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(c), (3)

Colorado waiver-notice safeguard

Unless represented at signing, a party must receive the prescribed conspicuous notice or a plain-language explanation of modified or waived rights.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
financial disclosurestatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(1)(d), (4)

Colorado financial-disclosure safeguard

Before signing, a party needs reasonably accurate property, liability, and income information plus good-faith values, or adequate knowledge or a reasonable basis for it.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
spousal supportstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-309(5), (7)

Colorado maintenance and fee safeguard

An otherwise enforceable agreement is unenforceable to the extent a maintenance or attorney-fee term is unconscionable at enforcement.

  • The court decides unconscionability as a matter of law.
child supportstatute

C.R.S. § 14-2-310

Colorado child and custody limits

A term may not adversely affect child support, and custodial-responsibility terms do not bind the court.

  • Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
limitationsofficial guidance

C.R.S. §§ 14-2-311–313; 2013 Colo. Sess. Laws ch. 239

Colorado limitations and enactment history

Colorado tolls limitations during marriage, preserves laches and estoppel, directs uniform construction, and limits E-SIGN preemption; HB 13-1204 took effect July 1, 2014.

  • Section 14-2-309(5) was amended by SB 15-264 effective August 5, 2015.
formalitiescase reporter

In re Marriage of Zander, 2021 CO 12, 480 P.3d 676

Colorado Supreme Court signed-writing interpretation

Zander held the predecessor Act's writing-and-signature rule controlled and partial performance did not validate an oral agreement.

  • Zander concerns a 2007 marital agreement; counsel must map it carefully to the current Act.
independent counselcase reporter

In re Marriage of Williams, No. 25CA0234 (Colo. App. Dec. 4, 2025) (not published under C.A.R. 35(e))

Recent Colorado plain-language interpretation

Williams concluded that legalistic waiver language was not the required plain-language explanation for an unrepresented signer.

  • The nonpublished opinion is an issue-spotting signal, not binding precedent; counsel must determine permissible use.