In Stoeckel v. Stoeckel, Attorney Charles R. Ullman, along with co-counsel Travis R. Taylor of Marshall & Taylor, PLLC, successfully helped our client, Mindy Stoeckel, void a premarital agreement after establishing her former husband’s post-separation extramarital conduct.
The Disputed Premarital Agreement
When Todd and Mindy Stoeckel signed a premarital agreement and got married in November 2013, the couple agreed to strict rules regarding adultery, including:
- If Mindy commits adultery during the marriage, she waives her right to any alimony or postseparation support.
- If Todd “commits adultery or engages in any form of illicit sexual behavior as defined by North Carolina law,” the entire premarital agreement is void.
The couple then separated in December 2021, and the divorce was finalized in March 2023. However, Todd revealed during his deposition that he had sexual intercourse with another person before that divorce decree was entered.
Because he was still legally married at the time, the court granted summary judgment in our client’s favor and voided the premarital agreement. This means the court agreed that there was no need for a full trial since there was no real dispute about the facts of the case.
Defending the Verdict at the North Carolina Court of Appeals
After the judgment, Todd appealed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, arguing that the trial court used an incorrect meaning of adultery when deciding the case. He believed that the “adultery” should have been limited to acts before the couple separated, using the definition of “marital misconduct” under N.C.G.S. § 50-16.1A(3).
On appeal, Charles Ullman and co-counsel successfully defended the trial court’s ruling before a three-judge panel. The appellate court disagreed with Todd, stating that the narrower “marital misconduct” meaning generally only applies in the context of alimony decisions. As the premarital agreement didn’t provide any limiting language to its definition of adultery for Todd’s clause, his actions qualified under the plain legal meaning of the word.
The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s summary judgment, and the entire premarital agreement remains void.
A Triumph of Dedicated Family Law Advocacy
This favorable outcome in Stoeckel v. Stoeckel is an example of the meticulous dedication we put into every case we handle at Charles R. Ullman & Associates. Our experienced legal team, led by a North Carolina State Bar-Certified Family Law Specialist, knows the investigative methods necessary to uncover critical evidence and present compelling arguments to defend our clients’ rights, whether in negotiations, at trial, or on appeal.
Each case is unique, and past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
