Chapter 9 Marriage Krug v Krug Ramieri v Ramieri F a woman violated terms of divorce and got married within 60 days of divorce But new husband was leaving for Vietnam War and he died She filed for inheritance but his parents fought it I should the woman be allowed to get the inheritance tax Was marriage valid H under common law the couple was married and she was allowed to inherit F got married by an Internet ordained minister Woman left the man after 84 days and filed for divorce base on inhuman behavior I was the marriage valid Was the ante nupital agreement valid H NY court said no the marriage was not valid because unauthorized officiant The ante nupital agreement was not valid where they waived their rights and claims acquired by the marriage The defendant agreed to give the plaintiff 90 000 within 90 days of marriage which was invalid Torres v Torres NJ 1976 F The man and woman knew each other in Cuba the man came to America and wife still in Cuba they have a proxy marriage Husband brings wife to America later denies the validity of marriage I Is proxy marriage legal in NJ H NJ can recognize the proxy marriage from Cuba states want to recognize commitment and he went to great lengths to demonstrate o Took great lengths to bring wife to America o Lived together for 7 years had a child shared surname Meister v Moore Supreme Court gives good explanation of historical basis for common law right to marry in US Common law marriage was a way for a state to impose married status upon couples even when they had failed to a way to achieve marital status it is not a distinct type of marriage they are still married just got there in different way Moe v Dinkins F NY State says boys 16 18 and girls 14 18 must get permission from both sets of parents to get married Girl was 15 and boy was 18 they had one year non married and has a child and living together she then becomes pregnant again and want to marry the man mom refused to give permission because she wanted to still get welfare for the dependent girl Couple sued saying it violated their liberty guaranteed by due process and 14th amendment I is a state requiring minors to get permission to marry by parents an obstruction of freedom H court said no because she was a minor and she was not being denied her fundamental right to marry because when she turns 18 she will be allowed to Marriage of JMH and Willis Rouse v Concerning Weld County Department of Human Services F appellant Rouse was incarcerated for charge of sexual assault on a child Rouse and minor JMH who was 15 years old and they applied for marriage license Even though JMH was emancipated her mother agreed to consent to the marriage and the clerk approved the application and approved to send it back to them stating they were fully registered as a legally married couple Department files that the marriage was invalid because JMH was 15 and lacked approval by parent and various criminal matters of Rouse Rouse argues they are legally married under common law I was their marriage valid Was JMH at a reasonable age to marry H trial courts said no because JMH was under 16 and needed judicial approval this was appealed and Colorado Courts of Appeals agreed with Rouse and said person under 16 does not need judicial approval to be married even if that marriage is common law court does not have specific age requirement for common law marriage Matthew Koso rapist or husband and father o In own state they cannot get married because she is too young but in another state they can so they get married and then when return state they are sued because he s having sex with an underage girl in one state he s considered a rapist and another state he is a husband and father o State says no and sends him to jail now 14 year old girl left to raise child alone o She gets together with another man but he was violent and gets her pregnant o Koso comes back after jail and he moves back in with her and she gets pregnant again o In the end it doesn t end up working out Israel v Allen F man and woman get married and he adopts her daughter she then becomes involved with his son from previous marriage and they want to get married Colorado denies giving them marriage license because they were siblings based on common father I Can siblings of adoption marry o They are not blood related H no if siblings by adoption or half siblings and no blood relation then they can marry Matter of the Estate of Marshall G Gardiner Kansas supreme court rejected a more expansive definition of female when determining if a marriage to a transsexual spouse was valid question of physical capacity Said a marriage between a post operative male to female transsexual and a man is a void marriage because legislature only recognizes traditional marriage between a man and a woman ad rejected the transsexual from inheriting her husband s estate Blair v Blair F man and woman married an affair at work woman becomes pregnant and tells the man it is his child and they begin relationship again and she gets pregnant again woman ends marriage with husband and then man and woman get married and he adopts her two kids She files for divorce and man files for annulment saying he was induced to get married because thought kid was his I should the marriage be annulled H court denies annulment because wife believed the son was his and wife did not intend to make this the reason she was married Court decides he would have married the woman either way and that they could not grant an annulment but they could get a divorce VJS v MJB F couple gets married and agrees to get married then one spouse wants kids I is this a reason for annulment H Yes the agreement of the marriage was not to have children and the defendant committed a fraud by agreeing to marriage contract State v Lynch F defendant files for marriage with 2nd woman when still married to the first first marriage was done by Catholic layman who received credentials for 10 via mail order I Was the first marriage valid H state must determine if the first marriage was valid State had failed to prove prior marriage and second marriage would not be bigamy and defendant s non suit should have been granted F Reynold s argued first amendment right of freedom of religion because he was Mormon and had multiple wives and polygamy was criminalized in Utah after it became US territory I is polygamy allowed for Mormons H no man is allowed to believe whatever he wants to believe but he cannot put it into illegal A