According to court documents obtained by The Blast, Maines is asking the court to bifurcate the issue (meaning she wants it decided on separately from the rest of the case).
“If the issue of the validity of the Prenuptial Agreement was bifurcated, this would allow an early disposition of most of the dissolution issues regarding property and support,” Natalie Maines writes in her declaration.
She of their disagreement, “Respondent claims that the Prenuptial Agreement is invalid. Respondent claims he did not understand the terms of the Prenuptial Agreement, that he did not understand the legal effect of the Prenuptial Agreement, that the terms of the Prenuptial Agreement are presently unconscionable and that he did not have adequate knowledge of my property and financial obligations when he signed the Prenuptial Agreement. I disagree.”
As The Blast first reported, Pasdar is challenging the validity of the prenup the couple signed back in 2000.
Pasdar has said he “does not recall the events related to the drafting and negotiation of the prenuptial agreement in 2000.”
Pasdar’s attorneys say they are willing to divide up the former couple’s assets pursuant to the terms in the prenup but he has a problem when it comes to spousal support.
The prenup calls for neither side to receive spousal support, which his attorneys call “unconscionable.”
“Natalie’s assets and income are far greater than Adrian’s,” his attorneys write. “At present, Adrian lacks the financial resources from which to support himself and their children at a level anywhere near the marital standard.”
A hearing on the matter has been set for June.