Summary
In Beaudin v. Suarez, 365 Mich. 534, 113 N.W.2d 818 (1962), and Watts v. Gen. Motors Corp., 308 Mich. 499, 14 N.W.2d 68 (1944), the Michigan Supreme Court held that the presumption of validity of a second marriage can be overcome by proof of the existence of a prior common-law marriage that neither party asserted was dissolved.
Summary of this case from Croskey v. Ford Motor Company-UawOpinion
Docket No. 54, Calendar No. 49,377.
Decided March 15, 1962.
Appeal from Wayne; Bowles (George E.), J. Submitted January 9, 1962. (Docket No. 54, Calendar No. 49,377.) Decided March 15, 1962.
Bill by Henrietta Beaudin against Guillermo Suarez for annulment of marriage. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Kozlow Friedman ( Bernard Friedman, of counsel), for plaintiff.
Piggins, Balmer, Grigsby, Skillman Erickson, for defendant.
Plaintiff sought and obtained in the circuit court an annulment of a probate court marriage with defendant. Defendant appeals. Plaintiff married Norman Beaudin in May, 1950; in August, 1954, she obtained a decree of divorce. Following the divorce, Mr. Beaudin asked the plaintiff if she was sure that a divorce was what she wanted. She replied that it was not what she wanted, and they decided to live together again as man and wife. They filed joint tax returns, went out socially, and spoke of each other as husband and wife. Plaintiff had a child February 13, 1956, and another June 20, 1957. Mr. Beaudin supported the children.
On February 7, 1956, plaintiff went through a ceremonial marriage with the defendant, filing an affidavit with the probate court stating that she was unmarried. Plaintiff lived with the defendant for 2 or 3 days. She then returned to Mr. Beaudin until either November, 1959, or early 1960, when plaintiff again lived with the defendant for approximately 3 months time. Plaintiff again returned to Mr. Beaudin and is presently living with him as his wife.
Common-law marriages were valid in Michigan in 1954. The facts above recited support the conclusion that the plaintiff entered into a common-law marriage with Mr. Beaudin in 1954, following her divorce. In re Tatar's Estate, 307 Mich. 342. There was no lack of agreement by the parties as in Clancy v. Clancy, 66 Mich. 202, and Hannigan v. Hannigan, 328 Mich. 378. Consequently, plaintiff was legally married and was unable to contract for, or enter into, a marriage with defendant in 1956. Daniels v. Daniel, 362 Mich. 176; Watts v. General Motors Corporation, 308 Mich. 499. The presumption of validity of a second ceremonial marriage ( In re Adams Estate, 362 Mich. 624) does not apply where, as here, there is a clear showing that the earlier marriage has not been dissolved.
CL 1948, § 551.2 (Stat Ann § 25.2), as amended by PA 1956, No 44, effective August 11, 1956 (CLS 1956, § 551.2; Stat Ann 1957 Rev § 25.2).
Affirmed. Costs to appellee.
DETHMERS, C.J., and CARR, KELLY, BLACK, KAVANAGH, SOURIS, and OTIS M. SMITH, JJ., concurred.