Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (13552)	10/24/2003 2:11:29 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793931

Do you have a sense of why all the talking heads keep saying otherwise? Because in general states do recognize the validity of a marriage which was valid in another state. For example, Virginia recognizes valid common law marriages contracted in other states, even though Virginia doesn't allow common law marriages. But, there are some things which the Old Dominion would never agree to, e.g., incestuous marriages and bigamous marriages. I think most talking heads are thinking about "full faith and credit", which applies to divorces. I don't think "full faith and credit" applies to marriages, I think it's comity.

To: Lane3 who wrote (13552)	10/24/2003 2:22:06 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 793931

I found a more recent (1996) Virginia case on point: .................... "A marriage's validity is to be determined by the law of the state where the marriage took place, unless the result would be repugnant to Virginia public policy." Kleinfield v. Veruki, 7 Va. App. 183, 186, 372 S.E.2d 407, 409 (1988); Hager v. Hager, 3 Va. App. 415, 416, 349 S.E.2d 908, 909 (1986). "A marriage entered into prior to the dissolution of an earlier marriage of one of the parties is [bigamous, and consequently,] a void marriage in . . . Virginia." Kleinfield, 7 Va. App. at 186, 372 S.E.2d at 409 (citing Code §§ 20-38.1 and 20-45.1(a)). Bigamous marriages "confer[] no legal rights" and are "contrary to the laws of Virginia and [its] public policy." Id. at 190, 372 S.E.2d at 411. Thus, when the parties purportedly married in California, the union was bigamous and void as a matter of law. 3 See Code § 20-43. ....................... Kelderhaus v. Kelderhaus, 21 Va. App. 721, 725, 467 S.E.2d 303, ___ (1996)