The Pre-nup Agreement: The Story of Evangeline (Part 2)
The Pre-nup Agreement:
The Story of Evangeline (Part 2)
ACT III
When a signature appears on a document, it is presumed that the signatory understood the meaning of the document. In Evangeline’s case, she claims she sign the document but she did not fully understand it.
Let’s examine what happened. A pre-nup agreement was drafted in California and it was sent in the Philippines to Attorney Rivero by John’s lawyer from California. Attorney Rivero’s task was to explain to Evangeline the contents and meaning of the pre-nup agreement. The question is, can Attorney Rivero’s explanation could stand in a court of law in California?
Maybe not. Attorney Rivero is not a licensed California lawyer but rather a Philippine lawyer and so he was not competent to interpret California laws. Attorney Rivero’s legal opinion regarding the pre-nup agreement is not considered a valid legal advice because Attorney Rivero lacks the knowledge, experience and training in interpreting California law. His legal opinion provided to Evangeline could be questioned in a court in California and could not be given proper weight as coming from an authoritative source. Attorney Rivero’s opinion is only as good as a lay person and not by someone who knows the law.
Going back to Evangeline, it would appear that she has good case and chance of invalidating the pre-nup agreement simply because of lack of understanding and improper legal advice.