Marriage

[howeird]

Back when I was in my teens, one of the things which had a big "oooh aaaaah" factor was common law marriage. According to the law, if you lived with your partner for 7 years, you were married just as legally as if you had marched down the aisle in funny clothes with people throwing rice and rose petals at you. We all thought that was cool.

If common law marriage is the law in California, and is retroactive, then I know at least three gay couples who are legally married whether or not they do the dance of the red tape.

Comments

[roswtr.livejournal.com]

California does not recognize common law marriages.

[johno.livejournal.com]

Wasn't there the Lee Marvin case in the early 80s that re-established it as viable standard?

[howeird]

Yeah, "palimony"

[roswtr.livejournal.com]

Not quite. The Marvin case firmly set the precedent for no common law marriage in California, making us a community property state instead. That's when pre-nups got fashionable.

[howeird]

Looking aroud the web, I see Lee Marvin won his case on appeal. But it was because the pal in question failed to prove she had a pledge from Lee to support her, which the courts would have accepted as a valid contract outside of marriage.

So maybe if my partnered gay friends put something in writing pledging to support each other forever, it could have some of the benefits of marriage?

[howeird]

1869, actually.