The Washington Court of Appeals has ruled that trial courts have the discretion to award attorney fees to financially disadvantaged spouses in divorce cases, even for issues beyond parenting plans. This decision, filed on October 29, 2026, in the case of In the Matter of the Marriage of Mark Jay Wondrack and Francisca Maria Wondrack (Docket No. 40513-3), clarifies the application of RCW 26.09.140, a statute that governs attorney fee awards in family law.

The ruling is significant for spouses who may face financial difficulties during divorce proceedings, as it allows for broader recovery of attorney fees. This means that even if a prenuptial agreement stipulates that each party will bear their own legal costs, a court can still award fees to ensure that a financially disadvantaged spouse can effectively participate in the legal process.

Background

Mark and Francisca Wondrack entered into an antenuptial agreement in 2018, prior to their marriage in July 2019. Mark had a substantial net worth exceeding $15 million, while Francisca's net worth was approximately $175,000. The antenuptial agreement included a clause requiring each party to pay their own attorney fees in the event of a divorce or separation.

During their marriage, Francisca primarily served as a stay-at-home mother, contributing to family expenses but not generating regular income. After filing for a domestic violence protection order in July 2022, Francisca initiated a legal separation, leading to a series of court proceedings that included disputes over attorney fees and the division of assets.

As the case progressed, Francisca incurred significant attorney fees, totaling over $131,000 by April 2023. She sought an award for these fees under RCW 26.09.140, which allows courts to grant reasonable attorney fees to a financially disadvantaged spouse. The trial court initially awarded her $35,000 in fees, but disputes continued over the enforceability of the antenuptial agreement and the extent of attorney fees that could be awarded.

The Ruling

The court ultimately ruled that the precedent set in the case of In re Marriage of Burke allows for a broader interpretation of attorney fee awards under RCW 26.09.140. The court stated, "When litigation involves parenting plan and child support issues, a trial court has discretion under RCW 26.09.140 to award reasonable attorney fees and costs to a financially disadvantaged spouse, despite a freely made contract to the contrary." This ruling emphasizes that the welfare of children must be prioritized in divorce proceedings.

The court found that limiting attorney fee awards solely to parenting plan issues would undermine the ability of financially disadvantaged spouses to effectively participate in legal proceedings. The judges on the panel included Lawrence-Berrey and Hill, with a concurring opinion from Chief Judge Staab.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for future divorce cases in Washington. It establishes that courts can award attorney fees beyond just those incurred in parenting plan litigation, helping to ensure that financially disadvantaged spouses are not deprived of their legal rights due to financial constraints. This decision may encourage more equitable outcomes in divorce proceedings, particularly for spouses who may otherwise struggle to afford legal representation.

Moreover, the ruling reinforces the notion that prenuptial agreements cannot completely eliminate a spouse's right to seek attorney fees in divorce cases, especially when children are involved. The court's interpretation of RCW 26.09.140 emphasizes the need for courts to balance the financial needs of both parties and the best interests of children.

What's Next

The case can potentially be appealed to the Washington Supreme Court, but details regarding any such plans were not included in the court filing. Additionally, the ongoing litigation between the Wondracks may lead to further legal developments as they continue to address issues related to their antenuptial agreement and the division of assets.