Bigamy is a family law issue which we haven’t discussed much at all on our blog, and the reason for this is straightforward: bigamy is something which occurs very rarely in society. Bigamy occurs when a married person obtains a second marriage to another person; since the first marriage remains valid, the married person is therefore involved in two marriages simultaneously. Bigamy is prohibited in Maryland law, just as it is prohibited by other jurisdictions around the country. Hence, as long as the first marriage was valid at the time of the second marriage, the second marriage is nullified by the first marriage. Bigamy can take place for a number of reasons, including fraud: in some cases, the person who obtains the second marriage may falsify records to indicate that the first marriage has legally ended.
In the recent case of Peete v. Peete (2023), a very unusual turn of events was litigated involving a first marriage which occurred all the way back in 1971. Let’s go over this case in detail so readers can see an example of a bigamous situation.
Facts of the Case
The spouses in this case were married in 1971 and then separated in 1975. There was one child conceived during the marriage. Almost 15 years after the couple’s physical separation, in 1991, the husband filed a petition for absolute divorce. This petition was granted, and then in 1992, just a few months after the divorce judgment, the husband remarried (in this case, the new wife’s name was Maryland!).
The husband remained married to the new wife until his death in 2007. Following the husband’s death, the husband’s second wife became the executor of his estate. The husband’s first wife (Bessie) attempted to have the divorce judgment vacated on the ground of improper service; furthermore, she sought to then have the marriage between her husband and his second wife annulled on the ground of bigamy. If the first wife succeeded in having her divorce judgment declared invalid, then the second marriage would necessarily be declared bigamous, because the husband would’ve been still married to the first wife at the time of the second marriage.
On July 30, 2013, a D.C. court determined that the service in the divorce case involving the first wife was in fact deficient and, consequently, the divorce judgment was declared invalid. Then, in 2020, the first wife initiated an action to annul the second marriage. Bessie admitted that the primary purpose of all the litigation was to obtain a portion of the deceased husband’s pension. The court in the annulment action determined that Bessie lacked standing to annul the second marriage. Bessie then filed an appeal, arguing that the conclusions of the trial court had been clearly erroneous.
Ruling & Discussion
On appeal, the appellate division concurred with the first wife Bessie that the trial court’s determination regarding standing was erroneous. Because the D.C. court in 2013 had vacated the 1991 divorce judgment based on improper service, the wife did still have standing to challenge the validity of the remarriage (in other words, she had standing to seek annulment of the second marriage). However, because the first wife was clearly driven purely by monetary gain, the appellate division ruled that Bessie was barred from obtaining the annulment and gaining a share of the pension on that basis. This situation was obviously unique for many reasons, one of which was the sheer amount of time which had passed between the husband’s remarriage and the first wife’s challenges. Because Bessie was only driven by monetary gain, the appellate division found that allowing her to succeed on that basis alone would be inequitable under the totality of the circumstances.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Information
Readers who wish to know more about bigamy related issues in Maryland law, the annulment process, standing to annul a marriage, vacating a divorce judgment in Maryland, or any other related family law matter, contact one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-222-1187.