propertystatute
Idaho Code § 32-921
Idaho statutory definitionsIdaho defines a premarital agreement as an agreement between prospective spouses made in contemplation of marriage and effective upon marriage, and defines property broadly to include present, future, legal, equitable, vested, contingent, real, personal, income, and earnings interests.
- The section was added by 1995 Idaho Session Laws chapter 229, section 2.
formalitiesstatute
Idaho Code §§ 32-917, 32-922
Idaho writing, signature, acknowledgment, and proof requirementsAn Idaho premarital agreement must be written and signed by both parties, is enforceable without consideration, and must also be executed and acknowledged or proved in the manner required for land conveyances.
- Section 32-922 was added in 1995 and expressly incorporates sections 32-917 through 32-919; Dunagan applies these statutory formalities strictly.
acknowledgmentstatute
Idaho Code §§ 32-918–919
Idaho real-property recording ruleWhen a marriage-settlement contract grants or affects real estate, Idaho requires recording in each county where that real estate is situated; a qualifying signed and acknowledged summary may be recorded, and recording or nonrecording has the same effect as for a real-property conveyance.
- Section 32-918 was amended in 2005 to authorize a qualifying summary; counsel must analyze the consequence of any nonrecording for the parties and third parties.
permitted subjectsstatute
Idaho Code § 32-923(1)
Idaho permitted agreement subjectsPermitted subjects include property rights and control, disposition, modification or elimination of spousal support, estate-planning arrangements, life-insurance benefits, choice of law, and other personal rights and obligations not violating public policy or criminal law.
- Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
child supportstatute
Idaho Code § 32-923(2)
Idaho child-support limitationAn Idaho premarital agreement may not adversely affect a child's right to support.
- Kelly adds a related public-policy limit for contractual attorney-fee bars covering child custody, visitation, or support issues.
effective datestatute
Idaho Code § 32-924
Idaho effect of marriageAn Idaho premarital agreement becomes effective upon marriage.
- Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
amendment revocationstatute
Idaho Code § 32-924
Idaho amendment and revocation formalitiesAfter marriage, amendment or revocation requires a written agreement signed by the parties and is enforceable without consideration.
- Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
voluntarinessstatute
Idaho Code § 32-925(1)(a)
Idaho voluntary-execution safeguardThe party resisting enforcement in Idaho may prove that the agreement was not executed voluntarily.
- Preserve the complete negotiation and execution record; this statement does not supply a state-specific multi-factor test beyond the statute.
financial disclosurestatute
Idaho Code § 32-925(1)(b), (3)
Idaho unconscionability and disclosure safeguardIdaho's execution-time unconscionability ground also requires all three statutory disclosure conditions: no fair and reasonable disclosure, no voluntary express written waiver, and no adequate knowledge of the other party's property or financial obligations.
- The disclosure conditions are conjunctive, and the court decides unconscionability as a matter of law.
public assistancestatute
Idaho Code § 32-925(2)
Idaho public-assistance support safeguardA court may require support to the extent necessary to avoid public-assistance eligibility caused by a premarital support modification or elimination at separation or dissolution.
- Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
void marriagestatute
Idaho Code § 32-926
Idaho void-marriage ruleIf a marriage is void, an otherwise premarital agreement is enforceable only as necessary to avoid an inequitable result.
- Application remains fact-specific and requires current licensed-counsel review.
limitationsstatute
Idaho Code §§ 32-927–929
Idaho limitations, uniformity, and enactment historyIdaho tolls an applicable limitation period for a premarital-agreement claim during marriage, preserves equitable time defenses including laches and estoppel, directs uniform construction, and designates sections 32-921 through 32-929 as the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act.
- The Act sections were added by 1995 Idaho Session Laws chapter 229, section 2; agreements predating enactment require separate historical-law review.
child supportcase reporter
Kelly v. Kelly, 171 Idaho 27, 518 P.3d 326 (2022)
Idaho Supreme Court child-related public-policy limitKelly held that contractual provisions barring attorney fees and costs for issues concerning child custody, visitation, and support violate Idaho public policy, while separately applying the agreement's text to disputed property.
- Kelly is clause-specific: it affirmed the agreement's general enforceability but invalidated the child-related fee bar and construed particular property provisions on their text and record.
permitted subjectscase reporter
Neustadt v. Colafranceschi, 167 Idaho 214, 469 P.3d 1 (2020)
Idaho Supreme Court life-insurance public-policy analysisNeustadt held that the agreement's post-divorce life-insurance obligation was not void as against Idaho public policy because it required the insured party to procure a policy Idaho law allowed her to obtain for the named beneficiary.
- The holding is tied to the clause and Idaho insurance statutes before the court; it is not a blanket approval of every insurance or public-policy term.
formalitiescase reporter
Dunagan v. Dunagan, 147 Idaho 599, 213 P.3d 384 (2009)
Idaho Supreme Court strict-formality interpretationDunagan declined to enforce the parties' alleged oral agreement to keep finances separate because Idaho requires marriage settlements to be written, properly executed, and acknowledged or proved; the claimed partial performance did not cure the missing formalities.
- Dunagan also addressed later property conduct; counsel must distinguish the alleged oral agreement from independently effective deeds or other compliant instruments.