DomAviator
Posts: 1253
Joined: 4/22/2008
Status: offline
|
Lesson 1 Wikipedia is not a valid resource.
Lesson 2. Palimony is a colloquial term not a legal one it is actually generally covered under the statue of frauds and is heard in the trial court. In California it began with Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal.3d 660 (1976). It has progressed to other states some relevant citations of which are below:
Alaska – Levar v. Elkins, 604 P.2d 602 (1980).
Arizona – Carroll v. Lee, 148 Ariz. 10, 712 P.2d 923 (1986); Cook v. Cook, 142 Ariz. 573, 691 P.2d 664 (1984).
Connecticut – Boland v. Catalano, 202 Conn. 333, 521 A.2d 142 (1987).
Florida – Poe v. Estate of Levy, 411 So. 2d 253 (1982).
Hawaii – Maria v. Frietas, 832 P.2d 259 (1992).
Indiana – Glasgo v. Glasgo, 410 N.E.2d 1325 (1980).
Iowa – Slorum v. Hammond, 346 N.W.2d 485 (1984).
Maryland – Donovan v. Seuderi, 51 Md. App. 217, 443 A.2d 121 (1982).
Massachusetts – Green v. Richmond, 369 Mass. 47, 337 N.E.2d 691 (1975).
Michigan – Carnes v. Sheldon, 109 Mich. App. 204, 311 N.W.2d 747 (1981); Tyranski v. Piggins, 44 Mich. App. 570, 205 N.W.2d 595 (1973).
Mississippi – Pickens v. Pickens, 490 So. 2d 872 (1986).
Nebraska – Kinkenon v. Hue, 207 Neb. 698, 301 N.W.2d 77 (1981).
Nevada – Hay v. Hay, 100 Nev. 196, 678 P.2d 672 (1984); Warren v. Warren, 94 Nev. 309, 579 P.2d 772 (1978).
New Hampshire – Joan S. v. John S., 121 N.H. 96, 427 A.2d 498 (1981); Tapley v. Tapley, 122 N.H. 727, 449 A.2d 1218 (1982).
New Jersey – Crowe v. DeGioia, 90 N.J. 126, 447 A.2d 173, appeal after remand, 303 N.J. Super. 22, 495 A.2d 889, aff'd., 102 N.J. 50, 505 A.2d 591 (1986).
New Mexico – Dominguez v. Cruz, 95 N.M. 1, 617 P.2d 1322 (1980).
New York – Morone v. Morone, 50 N.Y.2d 481, 429 N.Y.S.2d 592, 407 N.E.2d 438 (1980).
North Carolina – Suggs v. Norris, 88 N.C. App. 539, 364 S.E.2d 159, cert. denied, 322 N.C. 486, 370 S.E.2d 236 (1988).
Oregon – Beal v. Beal, 282 Or. 115, 577 P.2d 507 (1978); Ireland v. Flanagan, 51 Or. App. 837, 627 P.2d 496 (1981).
Pennsylvania – Mullen v. Suchko, 279 Pa. Super. 499, 421 A.2d 310 (1980).
Texas – Small v. Harper, 638 S.W.2d 24 (1982).
Washington – In re Estates of Thornton, 81 Wash.2d 72, 499 P.2d 864 (1972).
Wisconsin – Watts v. Watts, 137 Wis.2d 506, 405 N.W.2d 303 (1987); Matter of Estate of Steffes, 95 Wis.2d 490, 290 N.W.2d 697 (1980).
Wyoming – Kinnison v. Kinnison, 627 P.2d 594 (1981).
Furthermore, in many states there is the issue of "common law marriage".... To name a few Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, Oklahoma, and Texas which have various requirements for formation. For example in Texas, claiming to be someones spouse while cohabitating.... (Such as if a live in gf says "this is his wife" or she otherwise uses your last name)... etc...
The law is complex. Learn it to protect yourself and avoid the doormat syndrome - you have rights know them and be prepared to exercise them....
|
RE: Sigh. I am in at law school. - 
Profile
of course, your mileage may vary. 
, the light just went off, you might not be able to nail his assets....you dont want a boyfriend, you want a husband for all your aforementioned. I'm thinking your dom is a very intelligent individual and surely is aware of all this...that may be why he might never marry you...he knows better.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread