The prenup checklist.
What to do, in what order, starting twelve months before the wedding. This is the part that decides whether the agreement survives.
Almost every article about prenups is about what to put in one. This page is about the order you do things in, because that is what a court actually examines when someone tries to tear the agreement up fifteen years later.
The single most useful sentence on this site
Start twelve months before the wedding, not three. Every procedural protection below — real disclosure, two separate lawyers, time to think, a signature that is not made under the weight of a paid-for venue — costs nothing extra if you start early and becomes impossible if you start late. Time is the cheapest input and the one people spend first.
The short version7 points · tap one to jump to it
- Twelve to six months out
- The disclosure schedule — do this properly or do not bother
- Six to three months out
- The signing
- After the wedding
- State by state: what can undo it — These are the rules that change by state — a waiting period written into the statute, whether a lawyer is required, and how the state treats a waiver of spousal support, which is the clause most likely to be thrown out.
- Red flags that should stop you signing — All of them make an agreement vulnerable, which is bad for both of you — an agreement that gets thrown out protects nobody, and the person who insisted on the rush is usually the person it was supposed to protect.
In this subject 7
Twelve to six months out
The short version7 points · tap one to jump to it
- Twelve to six months out
- The disclosure schedule — do this properly or do not bother
- Six to three months out
- The signing
- After the wedding
- State by state: what can undo it — These are the rules that change by state — a waiting period written into the statute, whether a lawyer is required, and how the state treats a waiver of spousal support, which is the clause most likely to be thrown out.
- Red flags that should stop you signing — All of them make an agreement vulnerable, which is bad for both of you — an agreement that gets thrown out protects nobody, and the person who insisted on the rush is usually the person it was supposed to protect.
In this subject 7
- Both of you say out loud what the agreement is for. Protecting a family business, a prior marriage’s children, a professional practice, an inheritance, one person’s student debt. If you cannot articulate the purpose in a sentence, you are not ready to draft, and a court reading the agreement later will not be able to see the purpose either. The agreements that survive tend to have an obvious reason for existing. The ones that read as a general grab tend not to.
- Each of you hires your own lawyer. Not one lawyer “who will be fair to both of us.” Two. In California, an agreement is presumed involuntary unless the challenging party either had independent counsel or expressly waived counsel in a separate writing after being advised to get one. In Minnesota, separate counsel is mandatory for a postnup. In Colorado and North Dakota, being denied access to counsel is a standalone ground to void. If the wealthier party is paying for both lawyers, that is common and generally fine — but the second lawyer must be chosen by, and answerable to, the other person.
- Build the disclosure schedule before anyone drafts a clause. This is the step people skip and it is the one that kills agreements. See the next section.
The disclosure schedule — do this properly or do not bother
A prenup is an agreement to give something up. A court will not enforce a giving-up by someone who did not know what they were giving up. What counts as “knowing” is where states diverge sharply.
- List every asset with a real number and a date. “Various brokerage accounts” is not disclosure. “Schwab account ending 4471, $312,880 as of 14 March 2026” is.
- Value the illiquid things honestly, and say how you valued them. A private business at book value is the single most common disclosure failure. If a real valuation is not practical, say so in the schedule and say what basis you used — a stated method beats a bare number.
- Do not omit the things that have not happened yet. Unvested equity, a pending inheritance, a deferred bonus, an expected distribution. These are exactly what the fight will be about in twenty years.
- List the debts too. Disclosure runs to “property and financial obligations” in almost every statute. Undisclosed debt cuts against the person who hid it just as much as undisclosed wealth.
- Attach the schedule to the agreement and have both people initial every page. Then keep a complete signed counterpart each, with the schedule attached. An agreement whose schedule cannot be produced later is an agreement with no disclosure.
- Know which standard your state uses, because it changes the stakes enormously. Under the 1983 uniform act, a disclosure failure alone is not enough — the challenger must also prove the whole agreement was unconscionable when signed. Under the 2012 act (Colorado, North Dakota) and in states like Iowa and Connecticut, inadequate disclosure is a standalone ground. Utah is the far end: it requires proof of fraud, not mere unfairness.
Six to three months out
- Exchange drafts in writing and keep every version. A negotiation record with both sides’ markups is powerful evidence that the agreement was bargained rather than handed over. Its absence is evidence of the opposite.
- Make sure the weaker-position party asks for changes, and gets some. An agreement that came back unchanged from the other side looks like an ultimatum in hindsight, even when it was not.
- Decide the spousal support question deliberately. This is the clause with four different legal answers depending on your state — void in Iowa, floored by public assistance in most, requiring independent counsel in California, entirely unfloored in South Dakota. Read your state’s row on the main guide.
- Talk about a sunset or a step-down. Not required anywhere, but agreements that soften over a long marriage — a waiver that erodes after ten years, a fixed payment that grows with the years married — are dramatically easier to defend later, and they are the honest answer to “this was fair in 1999 and grotesque in 2026.”
The signing
- Sign at least thirty days before the wedding, and further out if you can. Only California and Minnesota put a number in the statute, and both use seven days. Treat seven as a floor that two states happen to have written down, not as a target. Everywhere else timing is evidence of duress, and a month of daylight is cheap insurance. California’s seven days runs from first presentation of the final agreement to signing, and since 1 January 2020 it applies even if you had your own excellent lawyer. Minnesota’s seven days runs to the wedding and shifts the burden of proof rather than voiding outright.
- Sign on different days, in different rooms, each with your own lawyer present. Free, and it removes the whole picture of one person signing under the other’s eye.
- Get the formalities exactly right for your state. New York is the trap here: signatures must be acknowledged to the standard required to record a deed. A merely witnessed New York prenup is not a prenup.
- Have each lawyer write a short letter confirming they advised their own client. Not required by statute anywhere we found. Enormously useful fifteen years later when the question is whether advice was actually given.
- Both of you keep an original. Store them separately.
After the wedding
- Actually live by it. Commingling the separate account the agreement says is separate is the quiet way people undo their own prenup. If the agreement says an account stays yours, do not run joint expenses through it.
- Revisit it when something structural changes. A child, a career ended to raise that child, a business sold, a move to another state. A move matters more than people expect — you may have signed under one state’s rules and be divorcing under another’s.
- Amend only in a signed writing. Every statute we read requires it, and every statute we read makes an amendment enforceable without new consideration. Nothing informal counts.
State by state: what can undo it
The steps above work everywhere. These are the rules that change by state — a waiting period written into the statute, whether a lawyer is required, and how the state treats a waiver of spousal support, which is the clause most likely to be thrown out. Two states put a number of days in the statute; California goes furthest on counsel, and three states void a support waiver outright.
| State | Waiting period | Independent counsel | Support waiver | Watch for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Enforced as written | No statute. The burden sits on the spouse relying on the agreement, so a waiver signed without a lawyer or full disclosure is exposed. source |
| Alaska | none in statute | not required | Unsettled | Brooks was a property case. No Alaska Supreme Court decision on an alimony waiver was found. source |
| Arizona | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | The override lifts support to the public-assistance line, not to a normal alimony award. source |
| Arkansas | — | — | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Waiving disclosure without a lawyer does not count. source |
| California | 7 days | effectively required | Judged again at divorce | No lawyer at signing and the waiver fails outright. With one, a judge can still refuse it at divorce. source |
| Colorado | none in statute | required in substance — access to counsel | Judged again at divorce | Judged by the circumstances at divorce. No public-assistance clause – the unconscionability test does that work. source |
| Connecticut | none in statute | required in substance — a reasonable opportunity to consult | Judged again at divorce | A waiver that has become unconscionable by the divorce can be struck. source |
| Delaware | none in statute | not required | Enforced as written | Delaware left out the uniform act’s public-assistance safety valve. source |
| District of Columbia | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Support only up to the public-assistance line. source |
| Florida | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | A judge can still order support during the divorce, whatever the prenup says. source |
| Georgia | — | — | Judged again at divorce | A properly signed waiver can still fall if life has changed enough since signing. source |
| Hawaii | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | The only safety net is public assistance, not general unfairness. source |
| Idaho | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | A spouse left poorer but not public-assistance-eligible gets no relief. source |
| Illinois | none in statute | not required | Judged again at divorce | Unforeseen hardship, such as a disability, can override the waiver. Foreseeable hardship cannot. source |
| Indiana | — | — | Judged again at divorce | ‘Extreme’ hardship is a higher bar than Illinois’s ‘undue’ hardship. source |
| Iowa | none in statute | not required | Cannot be waived | An alimony waiver in an Iowa prenup is unenforceable however fair it looked when signed. It also voids waivers of attorney fees tied to support. source |
| Kansas | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | The waiver stands unless it would leave a spouse on public assistance. source |
| Kentucky | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Judged again at divorce | Fairness is checked again at divorce, not only at signing. source |
| Louisiana | none in statute | not required by the Code text | Unsettled | Support during the divorce is available even after waiving ‘all’ support. source |
| Maine | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Agreements signed before 1 October 1993 could lapse 18 months after the couple had a child unless reaffirmed in writing. source |
| Maryland | none in statute | not required by statute | Enforced as written | Because engaged couples are treated as being in a relationship of trust, the burden is on the spouse enforcing it. source |
| Massachusetts | none in statute | not required by statute | Judged again at divorce | A waiver that was fair at signing can still be set aside at divorce. source |
| Michigan | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Judged again at divorce | A Michigan judge can still award support from either spouse’s assets if the needier spouse’s share is not enough to live on. source |
| Minnesota | 7 days | a meaningful opportunity to consult counsel is required | Judged again at divorce | Skip the seven days or the witnesses and the whole agreement is at risk. source |
| Mississippi | — | — | Enforced as written | A waiver that turned out worse than expected will generally stand. source |
| Missouri | none in statute | not required by statute | Enforced as written | A large income gap alone will not void the agreement if disclosure and process were fair. source |
| Montana | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Support only up to the public-assistance line. source |
| Nebraska | none in statute | not required, but weighed | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | The waiver holds unless it would push the spouse onto public assistance. source |
| Nevada | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Judged at signing, not at divorce. source |
| New Hampshire | none in statute | not required by statute | Judged again at divorce | A big enough change in circumstances can undo the waiver. source |
| New Jersey | none in statute | an express statutory factor | Enforced as written | Since 2013, a waiver that became harsh by the divorce cannot be attacked on that ground. source |
| New Mexico | — | — | Cannot be waived | A New Mexico prenup cannot waive or reduce spousal support at all. source |
| New York | none in statute | not required by statute | Judged again at divorce | Checked twice, and a missing notary acknowledgment can void the whole agreement. source |
| North Carolina | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | North Carolina adds a dependent-spouse finding before the override applies. source |
| North Dakota | none in statute | required in substance — access to counsel | Judged again at divorce | The hardship review applies to any term, not only support. source |
| Ohio | none in statute | not required by statute | Judged again at divorce | Support terms that were fair when signed can be rewritten at divorce. source |
| Oklahoma | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Unsettled | No Oklahoma Supreme Court holding on alimony waivers. source |
| Oregon | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Oregon’s floor also covers medical assistance. source |
| Pennsylvania | none in statute | not required | Enforced as written | Courts will not ask whether the terms are reasonable. A lopsided waiver stands if disclosure was adequate. source |
| Rhode Island | none in statute | not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | ‘And’ where every other state says ‘or’ – among the hardest prenups in the country to challenge. source |
| South Carolina | none in statute | strongly encouraged by statute | Judged again at divorce | Changes the spouse could foresee – expected health decline, for instance – did not defeat the waiver. source |
| South Dakota | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Cannot be waived | Even a limit on support, not only a full waiver, is void. The property terms can survive. source |
| Tennessee | — | — | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | The public-charge floor comes from the court, not the statute. source |
| Texas | none in statute | not required | Enforced as written | No public-assistance override, and common-law defenses are expressly excluded. source |
| Utah | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Utah’s test is ‘fraudulent’, not ‘unconscionable’, and the section was renumbered on 1 September 2024. source |
| Vermont | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | In 2025 the Vermont Supreme Court reversed a trial court that had struck a full maintenance waiver. source |
| Virginia | none in statute | not required | Enforced as written | No public-assistance override – Virginia left that clause out. source |
| Washington | none in statute | not required by statute | Enforced as written | A one-sided support bar makes the agreement unfair, and then the procedure has to be spotless. source |
| West Virginia | none in statute | not required by statute | Enforced as written | Without a lawyer on each side, the presumption flips onto the spouse enforcing it. source |
| Wisconsin | none in statute | expressly not required | Enforced, with a public-assistance floor | Without an explicit maintenance waiver, the court can still award maintenance. source |
| Wyoming | none in statute | not addressed by statute | Unsettled | No Wyoming Supreme Court holding on an alimony waiver specifically. source |
Waiting period and counsel columns from our state-by-state statute table; a dash means we could not confirm that state from an official source. Support-waiver column from the alimony waiver research. All read 21 September 2026.
Red flags that should stop you signing
If any of these is true, do not sign this week
You are being asked to sign inside a month of the wedding · you have not seen a complete list of the other person’s assets and debts · you have no lawyer, or your lawyer was picked and paid for by your fiancé’s family · you are told “it’s standard, you don’t need to read it” · you are told your questions are a sign you don’t trust them · the schedule of assets has values you know to be wrong · you are being asked to waive something and you cannot say what it is worth.
None of these makes anyone a bad person. All of them make an agreement vulnerable, which is bad for both of you — an agreement that gets thrown out protects nobody, and the person who insisted on the rush is usually the person it was supposed to protect.
Now the substance
Annotated clause language, with commentary on what holds and what does not.
Read this part
The Cusp is not a law firm and nothing on this page is legal advice. This is an explanation of how these agreements work and where they fall apart, written so you can have a better conversation with a lawyer — not so you can skip having one. Prenups are one of the few documents where doing it yourself reliably costs more than it saves, because the thing that voids them is almost never the wording. It is the process.
Every rule below is cited to a statute and linked to the state’s own text. Where we could not confirm a state, we say so instead of filling it in.