Divorce without a Marriage License

[planetmark]

I finally got hold of a certified copy of my "marriage license" from the county recorder. It isn't signed by anybody except the person who issued it a week before the wedding. I also got the application form to see what they look like in that state. Nothing on the app but basic personal identifying stuff - name, age, etc. And there is nowhere to sign on it anyway. Add to this that my soon-to-be-ex was 17 when we married, and the license says "consent to marry minor" printed on it, but no signature of her mother, and no paperwork on file recording this "consent".

So, does this really mean that I'm not "legally married" and the state has no authority in this? There is no signature to recind, and she was a minor. So, what happens next? I'm preparing for SMJ challenge for the divorce, and this looks like good ammo. Any thoughts? Suggestions for SMJ challenge wording are certainly welcome, but the trial date is coming up fast - Feb 1. What would you folks suggest doing at this point? If they dismiss this, that means all "child support" goes away too, right? And I can just go grab the children and bring them home?

By the way, the "marriage" was in a different state than the divorce proceedings, if that matters. I'd think that is extra fuel for SMJ challenge, but if there is no "state marriage" then that doesn't matter anyhow.

[Shoonra]

There should have been another document, a certificate of marriage, signed by the officiant (the clergyman or the judge who performed the ceremony) and one or two witnesses. They might have actually given it to you after signing, instead of sending it to the registrar themselves.

A marriage license is a license (this is cute) to the officiant to permit him to perform the ceremony; that is, actually, who and what is licensed. There is an expiration date on a marriage license ... if the ceremony is not performed within (IIRC) a year or two, the couple needs a new marriage license to have the ceremony.

One of the oddities of domestic relations law is that, although in several states (the number has been shrinking over the last century) it was possible to get married or become married without a wedding ceremony, in a common law marriage, there was no such thing as "common law divorce". Any marriage - even a common law marriage - required a divorce decree from a court to be dissolved so the parties would be free to marry someone else.

In other words, if someone is in a common law marriage, split up without going to court, and then tries to marry someone else, even in another common law marriage, he is committing bigamy and his second marriage is not valid because his first marriage was not dissolved.

No state recognizes common law marriages, anymore...so I have been told.

So, why is this "argument/stipulation" still being discussed?

Eric

[planetmark]

So my understanding then is that I need to get the current proceedings that my stbx started dismissed for lack of SMJ, because it is wrapped up in statutory attempts to rob me, steal my children, and give the state bonus points on their child support efforts. Then I'd start a new proceeding in a different court setting? Is this correct thinking? If so, then I need input on two items:

1) Any help to make sure this gets dropped from the statutory money grabbers.

2) How to proceed in setting up a real divorce (not dissolution) which doesn't result in "support payments" and other permanent long-distance continued relationship with this woman? What court level, how to phrase the paperwork to start it, etc.? I plan on being fair and reasonable with the children, but I can't let her have any control or she'll kill us all. And I don't want the State stuck in the middle.

Give me some feedback on this.

[planetmark]

Originally Posted by Eric

No state recognizes common law marriages, anymore...so I have been told.

So, why is this "argument/stipulation" still being discussed?

Eric

Good point... but how then does a person terminate a "marriage" that is not recognized by the state? I've heard divorce used to be exclusively done by the legislators in a case-by-case ordeal. But the State doesn't recognize this as a valid marriage... argh. Do I just get it dismissed and walk away?

[Akira]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Any marriage - even a common law marriage - required a divorce decree from a court to be dissolved so the parties would be free to marry someone else.

"Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery" Matt. 5:31-32

Under common law, if you can contract to bind, you can also contract to dissolve.

If there is a dispute between sovereigns, then the court has it's place, but it's not the only option.

Tell the corporate state to 'pound sand'.


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[test]

Someone posted this link in another thread:

http://www.originalintent.org/edu/marriage.php

It may give you some ideas as to how to approach the situation.

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by Eric

No state recognizes common law marriages, anymore...so I have been told.

So, why is this "argument/stipulation" still being discussed?

Eric

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Au contrare. Comity. Not to mention: Alabama, Colorado, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah. Failure of a State to recognize a lawful marriage does not neccesarily make the marriage of no effect.

[Shoonra]

I thnk a few states still recognize common law marriage. In any case, even in states that "unrecognized" it, they only insisted on ceremonial weddings prospectively and the old laws apply to common law marriages already in existence. And if a common law marriage is established in a state that still recognizes it, and then the couple moves to another state, the second state is bound (by the Full Faith and Credit clause) to recognize the marriage even if it wouldn't if it wouldn't allow people to commence a common law marriage in its own territory.

The requirement that even common law marriages require a real court divorce to be dissolved, that there is no "common law divorce", is something I thought was noteworthy and I pass it along as an interesting tidbit. It is very real law and plenty of court cases (negating subsequent attempts to marry by someone who already was in a common law marriage and didn't get a proper divorce) demonstrating it. Similarly, a common law marriage cannot be established in a couple that is ineligible to have a ceremonial marriage (e.g., underage, consanguinous, already married - even in another common law marriage, etc.).

[Freedomless]

It is a very real law .......

Any law that is in violation of the Constitution is null and void. This very real law does exactly that.