Wis. Stat. § 765.001
Wis. Stat. § 765.001
A land contract that required a reconveyance to the husband's parents if he became divorced within 10 years was not against public policy. In re Terrill v. Terrill, 98 Wis. 2d 213, 295 N.W.2d 809 (Ct. App. 1980). The family code does not preclude an unmarried cohabitant from asserting contract and property claims against the other cohabitant. Watts v. Watts, 137 Wis. 2d 506, 405 N.W.2d 303 (1987). The obligation of support is imposed under s. 765.001 and is not relieved simply because s. 766.55(2) (a) may not apply. Sinai Samaritan Medical Center, Inc. v. McCabe, 197 Wis. 2d 709, 541 N.W.2d 190 (Ct. App. 1995), 95-0012. Under the unique circumstances of the case, including prior residence in a common-law marriage state, the marriage of a Hmong couple who were married in a traditional Hmong ceremony that was not certified by the former Laotian government was valid. Xiong v. Xiong, 2002 WI App 110, 255 Wis. 2d 693, 648 N.W.2d 900, 01-0844. Under Xiong , a putative marriage is a marriage that has been solemnized in proper form and celebrated in good faith by one or both parties, but which, by reason of some legal infirmity, is either void or voidable. Here, the trial court properly found that the parties took part in traditional Hmong marriage rituals and that both of these parties believed they were married as supported by immigration documents in which one party represented that he was the other's husband, a real estate deed was signed by both parties as husband and wife, and the the parties submitted joint income tax returns. The Xiong case was not inapplicable because it was a wrongful death lawsuit, rather than a family court action, and the Xiongcourt's ruling that a putative marriage existed did not depend on its finding that the parties in that case had lived for years in a state that recognized common-law marriage. Xiong v. Vang, 2017 WI App 73, 378 Wis. 2d 636, 904 N.W.2d 814, 16-1281. As a general matter, whether a marriage is valid is controlled by the law of the place where the marriage is contracted. There is no legal authority for the proposition that the law of the parties' country of domicile should determine the validity of their marriage, rather than the law of the country where the marriage occurred. Xiong v. Vang, 2017 WI App 73, 378 Wis. 2d 636, 904 N.W.2d 814, 16-1281. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all states. The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, 135 S. Ct. 2584, 192 L. Ed. 2d 609 (2015). A wife's assets could be used to pay for her husband's appointed counsel. United States v. Conn, (E. D. Wis. 1986). Same-Sex Divorce and Wisconsin Courts: Imperfect Harmony? Thorson. 92 MLR 617.