Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    From some of the assinine law suit cases that I have heard of, I
    don't see how this is impossible.
    
    All you need is the right lawyer, enough guts to try it, and get
    a judge who won't laugh you out of the courtroom for bringing something
    as silly as that to him.
    
    Of course, it is my opinion that something like this is silly, stupid
    and totally ridiculous. May as well become a hermit or monk if
    something like that is going to happen. How do others feel about
    that?
    
    re .0: Bob, a quick question. If women can bring a case to court
    because some guy broke her heart (in Calif I think you mentioned)
    can a guy do the same thing if a woman breaks his heart in a similar
    manner?
    
    Mike

    re .0
    
    Why do you ask?
    
    You're kidding, right?  Sounds pretty far fetched to me.
    
    - M

    Actually, a proposal of marriage is often considered a legal contract,
    and you could be sued if you broke an engagement for "breach of
    promise", I believe.  Not quite what was suggested in .0, though.
    There have been LOTS of "palimony" suits, many of them successful,
    so it all depends on what evidence you have.
    					Steve

    RE: .0
    Small point, but there is no common law marriage in Florida, unless
    it was started in a state that recognizes common law marriage. 
    In fact, cohabitation is illegal in Florida.
    
    RE: .1
    I agree, this is a silly idea.  I see no reason why you owe your
    future earnings to someone because you were at one time living with
    and loving the person.  However, if such an idea would become law,
    it should apply to men and women equally.
    
    Kathleen

    Re:  .0.  Two comments:
    
    1.  The basis of the law in civil matters is that the law is whatever
    you can get either a judge or a jury to say it is.  There is nothing
    in Massachussetts law to prevent "Palimony" suits from being
    successful.It depends on what the judge will buy.  Silly as he/she
    can sometimes be.  In Europe (other than England) generally the
    law's attitude is that anything which is not specifically permitted
    is illegal, while in the US, Canada, and England the reverse is
    true.
    
    2.  What exactly is wrong with the notion that a man be responsible
    for his step-children (assuming that they are living with him)?
    I think that it would be a strange kind of relationship if a couple
    is married and that the husband (or wife if they're his children)
    aren't part of the family.  I certaily would assume that if I married
    a woman who has children that it is a "package deal".  
    
    What I find illogical and reprehensible is that fathers are allowed
    to forsake their children, as happens in so many cases.
    

    RE: .5 
    
    Cohabitation was illegal and common law marriage didn't exist in
    Florida when I lived there (I left in 1983).  I believe that Georgia
    has a common law marriage law, so that could be what you're thinking
    about.  Colorado (where I live now) has about the silliest common
    law marriage law setup I've ever seen.  All you need to do to become
    married is to tell someone that you are married.  Referring to your
    SO as your husband/wife referring to yourselves as Mr. & Mrs. is
    enough, even though you may have only known each other a few days.
    I asked a lawyer about this when I first moved here, and have been
    very careful not to become married to my SO.  I know a few people
    who have unwittingly 'married' their SO, then have to get a divorce.
    And, as you say, there are the enterprising women who take advantage
    of this if they think they can gain by it.
    
    Kathleen

    It seems to me that if common law marriage is so easy to acheive,
    then common law divorce should be no more difficult.  I.e., overhearing
    a phrase like "I can't stand the sight of you anymore." ought to
    do it.
    
    Dave

re. -1,

	Good point Dave.  Unfortunately, lawyers can't make any money
    on common law divorce, so it'll probably never become a reality.

						-DAV0

        The common law marriage laws described for Georgia and Colorado
        in eariler notes was also the law in Ohio about 15 years ago. As
        I remember it, if you represented yourself as married--you were.
        The proof may have needed to be in writing. I don't really
        remember.
        
        In general, in many states of the Union you'd better not call
        yourself Mr. & Mrs. or introduce your SO as your spouse unless
        you want to be married.
        
        JimB. 

    Re: -1.
    
    My point is that I think it is morally and ethically wrong to join
    into a marriage where either party has children and not adopt them.
    
    I don't think that it's even a bad idea legally.  The children aren't
    to blame for their existance, therefore it is not logical to exclude
    then from the family.  I see nothing wrong with both new parents
    being legaly responsible for the children of either partner along
    with the other parent from the previous marriage.  You can't just
    slough off the responsibility of the children by saying that they're
    someone else's responsibility.  By entering into a marriage you
    are in effect saying that your lives are a partnership: by any ethical
    or moral principle that means you share in your partner's
    responsibilities.  But that does not mean that the other parent
    (the one you didn't marry) is relieved from his or her sesponsibility
    to provide for and nurture their children.
    
    The primary impetus here is that the children must be cared for.
    
    And, yes! I think that in the event of a subsequent split-up, you
    should be jointly responsible for these children.
    
    I believe that until fairly recently, the laws (or at least custom)
    provided for exactly that state of affairs.  It is only since the
    easing of divorce that this has not been the case.
    
    

    Regardless of what they call it in NY or California, assuming there
    are no children involved, I believe the Mass acronym is SOL.
    
    Jon

    RE: .8  (Dave)
    
    >It seems to me that if common law marriage is so easy to achieve,
    >then common law divorce should be no more difficult.  I.e., overhearing
    >a phrase like "I can't stand the sight of you anymore." ought to
    >do it.
    
    I agree.  I also think that marriage is too easy to enter into,
    compared to how difficult divorce is.  You can in some states become
    married by introducing someone as your spouse.  It may take a year
    to divorce them after that.  Also, in most states, there is no more
    than a 3 day waiting period, none at all in some cases.  But again,
    a fairly long wait to divorce someone, as well as proof of sanity
    at the time of the divorce (why no need for proof of sanity at the
    time of marriage?  Maybe no one would be able to be married if that
    were the case :^)).  Meanwhile, you are responsible for someone
    else's debts, possibly for future support of the spouse, and
    the inability to marry someone you wanted to marry, all for something
    done on a whim.
         
    Kathleen

    re:.7
    
    Do you mean that under Colorado law, *one* person can declare a
    marriage simply by referring his or her SO as a spouse?! For
    example, if a man wanted to get married and his SO didn't, he
    could make it happen despite her wishes simply by calling her
    his wife in front of someone else without --- or possibly even
    with --- her knowledge or consent?
    
    --- jerry

    RE:  -1.
    
    As a matter of fact, a marriage can be declared against the wishes
    of either party, by refering to themselves as man and wife.
    
    In one famous case decided by the Supreme Court, a man took his
    girlfriend on a plane trip from New York to California.  He has
    bought the tickets in the name of "Mr & Mrs" whatever.  The plane
    crashed, but it had passed through the airspace of a state which
    recognized a "common-law marriage".  The man was killed outright,
    while his girlfriend (now wife) lived a few days before dying.
    Her family inheirited his entire estate which was considerable.
    
    You don't have to be residents of the state in question either.
    In "common-law marriage" states, if you say you are married - even
    in jest - you are.  And the crowning glory (or should that be 'clowning
    glory'?) of the whole matter is that you are also legally married
    in every other state since the US Constitution requires states to
    recognize the legal forms of all of the other states.
                                            
    The moral of this one is:  be careful.  Don't say it (or register
    as man and wife) unless you mean it.
    
    

    What happens if someone 'declares' him/herself married to more than
    one person, without getting divorced from the last spouse, either
    through an actual ceremony, or by 'declaring' another person to
    be a common law spouse?  Can someone who routinely registers as
    Mr. & Mrs. in motels with prostitutes or one night stands be jailed 
    for bigamy?
    
    Just curious,
    Kathleen

    Shure can.
    
    The problem here is enforcement.  It depends on just who wants to
    bother forcing the issue.
    
    But it certainly has happened in the past.  In the future, who knows?
    I would expect that it will not be as much of a possibility.
    
    Dirk

> < Note 19.16 by SSVAX::LUST >
>                               -< Made in Heaven? >-
> 
>     As a matter of fact, a marriage can be declared against the wishes
>     of either party, by refering to themselves as man and wife.
    
Great!  I think I'll go find some rich widow and publicly refer to her as my
wife.  Then, when she refuses to have me, I'll sue for divorce on grounds of
cruelty, and spend the rest of my life living off the alimony.

    Now that is the most sensible thing I've heard in a long time!
    How about Jackie Kennedy?

    Gee, I guess what I had heard before is wrong.
    
    Seems I had been told -- by some misguided sort, no doubt -- that
    "common law marriage" only existed when the parties _believed_ that
    they were married, and then had a period of time involved, typically
    seven years but varying by state (among the few states that recognized
    it).  This followed from the stated _purpose_ of common law marriage:
    To recognize as valid a marriage which the members of _believed_
    to be valid, even though the license might have been flawed, or
    missing because they thought they didn't need one, etc.  ("Legal"
    matters are not all so well known in some areas, especially rural.)
    
    But I guess my SO had better not find out about the "truth" or I could
    be in trouble!

    This situation varies from state to state, so it does not always
    apply.  My example reported previously was based on one example
    from the fifties.  Many states have changed their laws since then,
    so check with a lawyer before assuming you might be married.
    
    Also, there is always the problem of enforcement, if no-one cares,
    then the law doesn't either (especially nowadays!).  Remember that
    the law is whatever you can get a judge or jury to say it is.  

    For what it is worth...
    
    According to our lawyer:  in NH two things are required for common 
    law marriange to exist or to be judged to exist - 1. you and your
    SO must have lived in the same household for three or more years 
    and 2. during that time you have generally allowed the public to 
    believe you are married (by use of Mr/Mrs, using the same last name, 
    etc).
    
    He didn't think it was at all risky in NH, at this time, for couples
    who had no intention of marriage to share a home.
    
    Regards,
    		Audrey

    Re: .17, etc.
    
    When I got married, my spouse indicated that she felt the reason
    we married was 'cause it was big of me... I always thought that
    was a compliment! How can you go to jail for that?

    In any event, if .19 followed plan, wouldn't that be an example
    of rather lofty or high objectives? Wouldn't that then be Hi of
    You? Abbreviated I O U?    

    RE: .24
    
    	Are you sure she didn't say she felt it was BIGAMY?
    
    
    	Sorry, couldn't resist.
    
    	Dan

    RE: .24, .25
    
    Yep, I think this is big of all of us.  Let's all get married :^).
    
    Kathleen

    
    Here is one for all of you to read, it happen to me.  I was married
    for 13 years and my wife wanted no kids after trying to talk to
    her into having children for about ten years. I even wanted to adopt.
    There more to the story but my point is more importent for all of
    you to read on.  We finally seperated on our own, split everything
    we own 50/50 except for the bills I took the 65% of it cause I was
    making more money then her and I felt it was only right.  
    
    	Well everything was o.k. for about 2 1/2 years, I move to N.H.
    and re-invested my money in a Brand new Condo and one day I was
    at my mothers in Mass. late one night to tell her that my SO and
    I were about to be parents.  My dream after 13 years finally came
    true.  Well as I was leaving My Mother housing the Sheriff was awaiting
    for me with a court order that my wife was divorcing me.  Well we
    were suprise.  To court we and in the time we had seperated my x-wife
    got breast cancer and was going to all the treatments to the judge.
    Now I still have her On my insurance cause we were not divorce and
    it was a big deal and it help her should anything happen to her.
    
    	Well in court she was awarded 3/4 of my pay, cannot take her
    off my insurance and even if she works part time the alemony won't
    change.  Only by death or re-marriage.  Well she is working and
    part time making good money as an accountent for a New Car lot and
    still getting $175.00 of my 300.00 gross pay.  I tried to fight
    it cause I could not make ends meet and with the baby the court
    said that life.  It has been 2 years now and still nothing can be
    done about it.  My lawer said that if I went after her she would
    claim a relasp and leave her job and it would cost me $1,000. to
    go to court for what to loose again???  Yup. So if your married
    and are planning to have a divorce, make sure she don't have any
    cancer or you will pay for it, a long time.  IT IS the LAW.
    The judge was goo enough to show me in the Law books about this
    hole thing.  So that the way it will be.  -Gerry 

       Why are children always caught in the middle.
    
       Maybe we should REQUIRE as a high school curriculum a children
       rearing workshop and let out teens discover early what its all
       about.
    
       Amazed in my small town how many out-of-wedlock pregnacies and
       single parents there are.  The "me" generation is far from over!!