Indiana: Prenuptial Agreement Requirements
The short answer
Indiana requires a written prenuptial agreement signed by both prospective spouses; it needs no consideration and becomes effective upon marriage. The party resisting enforcement must prove either involuntary execution or unconscionability when the agreement was signed. Indiana has no statutory disclosure checklist, but financial knowledge, counsel, timing, and bargaining conditions can matter to those defenses, and a maintenance waiver may be overridden only to avoid extreme hardship caused by circumstances not reasonably foreseeable at signing.
Ask Ezel about your situation
This is the general rule in Indiana. Ezel applies current Indiana law to your specific facts and answers with citations to the statutes.
| Governing law and framework | Indiana Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, with a state-specific two-ground enforcement test (Ind. Code ch. 31-11-3) |
|---|---|
| Writing, signature, and effect | Writing signed by both; no consideration; effective upon marriage (§§ 31-11-3-4, -6) |
| Execution formalities | No notary, witness, acknowledgment, or recording formality in Chapter 3 for basic inter-party enforceability (§ 31-11-3-4) |
| Financial disclosure and waiver | No statutory fair-disclosure, written-waiver, or adequate-knowledge checklist; financial knowledge and bargaining conditions may bear on unconscionability (§ 31-11-3-8; Harrill) |
| Independent counsel and timing | No statutory counsel or fixed review/pre-wedding period; counsel, review time, and bargaining conditions are case factors (Harrill) |
| Fairness standard and source | Statute — challenger must prove involuntary execution or unconscionability when signed; court decides unconscionability as law (§ 31-11-3-8) |
| Spousal-support limits | Maintenance may be modified/eliminated, but court may award only what avoids extreme hardship from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable at signing (§§ 31-11-3-5, -8(b)) |
| Child and public-policy limits | Cannot adversely affect child support; custody remains a court best-interests decision; other terms cannot violate public policy or a criminal statute (§§ 31-11-3-5, 31-17-2-8) |
| Amendment and revocation | After marriage, only by a writing signed by both; no consideration required (§ 31-11-3-7) |
Compare this rule across all 50 states + DC →
Requirements one by one
Indiana uses its Uniform Premarital Agreement Act
Indiana Code chapter 31-11-3 is titled the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act.
Its current enforcement section supplies two defenses: involuntary execution
and unconscionability when the agreement was executed.
The agreement needs a writing and both signatures
Section 31-11-3-4 states the basic form directly: “A premarital agreement must
be in writing and signed by both parties.” It also says the agreement is
enforceable without consideration beyond the contemplated marriage.
Chapter 3 adds no notary, acknowledgment, witness, or recording step to that
basic inter-party rule.
Indiana has no statutory disclosure checklist
Section 31-11-3-8 does not contain a separate fair-disclosure, written-waiver,
or adequate-knowledge branch. That does not make financial information
irrelevant. Harrill explains that unconscionability can consider the agreement's
economic consequences, bargaining conditions, and a party's knowledge of the
other party.
Counsel and timing are circumstances, not fixed statutory periods
Chapter 3 does not mandate independent counsel or set a minimum review or
pre-wedding period. Harrill treats counsel as one consideration and upheld the
agreement there even though the challenger had no lawyer: she had been told she
could obtain one, reviewed the draft for several days, negotiated a revision,
and signed more than a week before the ceremony.
Those facts illustrate the inquiry; they do not create a universal safe harbor
measured in days.
The statute uses an execution-time fairness test
The party resisting enforcement bears the burden under § 31-11-3-8(a). That
party must prove either that execution was not voluntary or that the agreement
was unconscionable when executed. The court decides unconscionability as a
matter of law.
Harrill describes voluntary conduct as intentional and without coercion. For
unconscionability, it looks for gross bargaining-power disparity leading to an
unwilling or unaware signature plus terms that no sensible person free of
delusion, duress, or distress would accept. The doctrine looks to execution,
not a general second look at divorce.
Maintenance has an unforeseen-extreme-hardship safety valve
Ind. Code § 31-11-3-5 permits modification or elimination of spousal maintenance.
But § 31-11-3-8(b) allows a court to override that term if it causes extreme
hardship under circumstances not reasonably foreseeable when the agreement was
executed. The court may order only the maintenance necessary to avoid that
extreme hardship.
This is not a public-assistance or public-charge test. The statutory trigger is
extreme hardship plus execution-time unforeseeability.
Child matters and public policy remain outside complete private control
Section 31-11-3-5(b) says a prenup may not adversely affect a child's right to
support. Custody is also not conclusively fixed by the agreement: § 31-17-2-8
requires the court to determine custody according to the child's best interests
and all relevant factors.
Other personal-rights terms are permitted only if they do not violate public
policy or a statute imposing a criminal penalty.
A post-marriage change needs another signed writing
Under § 31-11-3-7, amendment or revocation after marriage is possible only by
a written agreement signed by both parties. The amendment or revocation needs
no consideration.
What trips people up
- Signing does not activate the agreement. Ind. Code §§ 31-11-3-2, -4, -6
say it becomes effective upon marriage. Calling the signature date the legal
effective date obscures that statutory condition.
Common questions
What about an agreement signed before July 1, 1995?
Ind. Code § 31-11-3-1 expressly applies Chapter 3 only to agreements executed
on or after July 1, 1995. An older agreement therefore requires analysis under
the law applicable outside this chapter.
What if the marriage is later held void?
Ind. Code §§ 31-11-3-9 to -10 addresses two edge cases. Section 31-11-3-9
permits an otherwise qualifying agreement to be enforced only to the extent
necessary to avoid an inequitable result.
Does a limitations period run while the spouses remain married?
Section 31-11-3-10 tolls an applicable limitations period during the marriage,
but it preserves equitable timing defenses, including laches and estoppel.
Statutes and sources
- Ind. Code ch. 31-11-3 — applicability, form, subject matter,
effectiveness, enforcement, maintenance, and changes after marriage.
Official 2026 chapter PDF
(accessed 2026-07-28). - Harrill v. Harrill, No. 24A-DC-1793 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 8, 2025) —
voluntariness, execution-time unconscionability, counsel, knowledge, and
bargaining conditions. Official
opinion
(accessed 2026-07-28). - Ind. Code § 31-17-2-8 — custody under the child's best interests.
Official 2026 chapter PDF
(accessed 2026-07-28).
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.
Get the answer for your situation
You just read how Indiana handles this in general. Ezel applies current Indiana law to your facts and answers your specific question, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.