Annulment/Divorce?

[grndslm]

Question about a lady friend who was married at a courthouse in AL, but resided in MS.

What's the cheapest and easiest way to handle her getting an annulment or divorce. Here are the facts:

- She's been married for three years.
- He slept with another woman 6 days after they were married.
- They tried to work things out, but it didn't work.
- They had no children.
- They've been separated for a little more than 2 years.
- He had no intention to remain faithful, didn't work, and was physically abusive with a few police reports... while she always had a job.
- And a good one from Wikipedia: "One partner had been deceived by the other in order to obtain consent, and if the partner had been aware of the truth, would not have consented to marry."

And just outta curiosity... if she got an annulment thru a Catholic church, would she still have to go thru the "legal" proceedings as well.

 

[Proserpina]

Question about a lady friend who was married at a courthouse in AL, but resided in MS.

What's the cheapest and easiest way to handle her getting an annulment or divorce. Here are the facts:

- She's been married for three years.
- He slept with another woman 6 days after they were married.
- They tried to work things out, but it didn't work.
- They had no children.
- They've been separated for a little more than 2 years.
- He had no intention to remain faithful, didn't work, and was physically abusive with a few police reports... while she always had a job.
- And a good one from Wikipedia: "One partner had been deceived by the other in order to obtain consent, and if the partner had been aware of the truth, would not have consented to marry."

And just outta curiosity... if she got an annulment thru a Catholic church, would she still have to go thru the "legal" proceedings as well.

She needs to see a divorce lawyer - annulment is much more difficult to obtain, takes quite a bit longer, and is quite a bit more costly.

Can she prove that didn't condone all of his behaviors?

(to the other question - yes. She'd still to go through the divorce)

 

[grndslm]

Anyway to do this without seeing a lawyer, tho? Paperwork and the English language are no problem for her. She actually already saw a lawyer, and he's apparently too assertive in wanting to sue the "perp" for paying for 5 years of psychiatry. She doesn't want to do all that and is getting bad vibes from her lawyer. Paying for another lawyer just seems ridiculous if this can be done pro se (I believe it's called).

As for proving that she didn't condone of his behavior... I'm not sure how one could do that without a video or audio recording. There are witnesses that know he cheated on her and was physically abusive, along with the police reports. I'm not sure what more proof would be needed...

 

[mistoffolees]

Anyway to do this without seeing a lawyer, tho? Paperwork and the English language are no problem for her. She actually already saw a lawyer, and he's apparently too assertive in wanting to sue the "perp" for paying for 5 years of psychiatry. She doesn't want to do all that and is getting bad vibes from her lawyer. Paying for another lawyer just seems ridiculous if this can be done pro se (I believe it's called).

It can be done pro se. She'll have to learn all the rules in her jurisdiction as well as the local procedures. However, I don't normally recommend it. If it turns out to be complicated case, you probably want an attorney on your side. If it's simple, it probably won't be too expensive.

As for proving that she didn't condone of his behavior... I'm not sure how one could do that without a video or audio recording. There are witnesses that know he cheated on her and was physically abusive, along with the police reports. I'm not sure what more proof would be needed...

All of that's irrelevant. The issue is whether she knew about it and then allowed him back into her life. If she forgave him and went on with a normal married person behavior, that is condoning the behavior - and would eliminate her ability to use adultery as grounds for divorce. Furthermore, I doubt very much that these alleged witnesses would do any good. Did they see adultery occur? If not, it's no more than hearsay which is inadmissible. THAT is one of the examples of why it's better to have a lawyer handle it.

 

[LdiJ]

Question about a lady friend who was married at a courthouse in AL, but resided in MS.

What's the cheapest and easiest way to handle her getting an annulment or divorce. Here are the facts:

- She's been married for three years.
- He slept with another woman 6 days after they were married.
- They tried to work things out, but it didn't work.
- They had no children.
- They've been separated for a little more than 2 years.
- He had no intention to remain faithful, didn't work, and was physically abusive with a few police reports... while she always had a job.
- And a good one from Wikipedia: "One partner had been deceived by the other in order to obtain consent, and if the partner had been aware of the truth, would not have consented to marry."

And just outta curiosity... if she got an annulment thru a Catholic church, would she still have to go thru the "legal" proceedings as well.

A religious annulment and a state recognized annulment or divorce are two completely separate things.

 

[grndslm]

OK... so a marriage is a contract between two people, right? If one of them breaks the contract, why would permission from the state be necessary in order for the two to divorce?

There has got to be an easier way for two people to become "legally" separated. One of them could just file a Notice of Understanding & Intent and Claim of Right... could they not? Claim that the opposite party did not uphold their end of the bargain, therefore, the marriage is broken and a divorce isn't necessary.

 

[thedoctorisin]

OK... so a marriage is a contract between two people, right? If one of them breaks the contract, why would permission from the state be necessary in order for the two to divorce?

Catholic author and laywer Frank Sheed explained it as follows, from his 1959 book "Nullity of Marriage":

Marriage, then, is a contract resulting in a relationship; better still, it is a relationship resulting from a contract.

For when the relationship comes into being the contract has done its work; it has produced the relationship of marriage, and the parties are now governed in their common life, not by the contract (which they made), but by the relationship (which God made in ratification of their contract).

The principle that, once married, the parties are bound no longer by their agreement but by the nature of marriage, belongs to civil law too. The very word "relation" is used--in a lesser sense than in Catholic doctrine but sometimes coming very close. In a Rhode Island case [Ditson v. Ditson, 4 R.I. 87, 101.] we find: "Though formed by contract, marriage signifies the relation of husband and wife.... When formed this relation is no more a contract than 'fatherhood' or 'sonship' is a contract."

For civil law the relation is not made by God; it is status rather than kinship; but there is the same sense that something has been brought into being that was beyond the power of the parties themselves to produce.​

http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/NULITY.TXT

 

[grndslm]

Marriage, then, is a contract resulting in a relationship; better still, it is a relationship resulting from a contract.

And while there might be ANOTHER relationship resulting from the contract, it was firstly a contract resulting from a relationship.

It goes from relationship > contract > "new" relationship. Is there really nothing that can "sour" this new relationship, other than thousands of dollars for the state, lawyers, etc.??

For when the relationship comes into being the contract has done its work; it has produced the relationship of marriage, and the parties are now governed in their common life, not by the contract (which they made), but by the relationship (which God made in ratification of their contract).

Do you have evidence of God's ratification? What if [one of] these people do not share the more popular beliefs of a marriage in God's eyes?

Even playing along with you.... the contract produced the relationship of marriage!! OK! Wouldn't the breaking of the contract produce the dissolution of the relationship of marriage? There is nothing common in their "common life" anymore.

For civil law the relation is not made by God; it is status rather than kinship; but there is the same sense that something has been brought into being that was beyond the power of the parties themselves to produce.

OK... so God isn't involved any more. There is only the state and these two individuals and their contract, which brought about a "new" relationship. Why must these two ask for permission/privilege to divorce from the state, when they both inherently know that they are separate??

Surely cheating/beating is grounds for an annulment. What about being drugged up during time of marriage? They were both taking Xanax at the time of "consent". Neither one of them can have children. There are just too many things wrong with their "marriage" to begin with, but it's more disturbing to me that the dissolution of marriage cannot happen without consent of the government, who wasn't in the contract to begin with.

 

[thedoctorisin]

You should read the first several pages of the link I gave if you really want to pursue this "marriage is a contract" theme. The very first paragraph in the body of the book reads:

VERY few single phrases can have wrought so much mischief as the phrase "Marriage is a contract". The man in the street repeats it, without full understanding, knowing nothing of all that goes with it in the mind of the expert; he has never heard of a contract (nor, indeed, is there one) that cannot be brought to an end by the consent of both parties; he therefore argues that marriage, too, since it is a contract, must be terminable in the same way.​

http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/NULITY.TXT

However, as far as the law is concerned, a civil divorce is easier and cheaper than a civil annulment. Only conditions present at the time of the wedding are relevant as far as grounds for an annulment is concerned. -- This would include being too high on Xanax to validly exchange vows, but it would not include any cheating or abuse that occurred after the wedding. The latter would be grounds for civil divorce.

Neither a civil divorce nor a civil annulment will change things with the Catholic Church; for that one needs a Catholic religious annulment in addition to the civil divorce or civil annulment.

 

[Ohiogal]

And while there might be ANOTHER relationship resulting from the contract, it was firstly a contract resulting from a relationship.

It goes from relationship > contract > "new" relationship. Is there really nothing that can "sour" this new relationship, other than thousands of dollars for the state, lawyers, etc.??

Do you have evidence of God's ratification? What if [one of] these people do not share the more popular beliefs of a marriage in God's eyes?

Even playing along with you.... the contract produced the relationship of marriage!! OK! Wouldn't the breaking of the contract produce the dissolution of the relationship of marriage? There is nothing common in their "common life" anymore.

OK... so God isn't involved any more. There is only the state and these two individuals and their contract, which brought about a "new" relationship. Why must these two ask for permission/privilege to divorce from the state, when they both inherently know that they are separate??

Surely cheating/beating is grounds for an annulment. What about being drugged up during time of marriage? They were both taking Xanax at the time of "consent". Neither one of them can have children. There are just too many things wrong with their "marriage" to begin with, but it's more disturbing to me that the dissolution of marriage cannot happen without consent of the government, who wasn't in the contract to begin with.

Actually the government WAS in the contract to begin with -- the whole marriage license. Not to mention the benefits such a marriage gave to them -- joint filing of income tax with income tax breaks, laws protecting them both when it comes to medical decisions/wills/insurance/retirement/property.

Cheating and beating is not grounds for an annulment. Nor is being drugged up during the time of marriage because they REMAINED married after coming down off their "high". Infertility is NOT a reason for annulment either.

Look you want your girlfriend freed -- got it. It doesn't have to cost thousands. All she has to do is file an uncontested divorce or a dissolution with full agreement on all issues.

 

[grndslm]

Look you want your girlfriend freed -- got it. It doesn't have to cost thousands. All she has to do is file an uncontested divorce or a dissolution with full agreement on all issues.

I want all my friends to be free, not just this one.

There is nothing to contest here... there is no private property between the two that they want to dispute, there are no children to worry about raising, etc. It should be open and shut in a second. It should not be costing her thousands of dollars, and this attorney should not be imposing his wishes upon her like he is doing.

She should fill out the Bill of Complaint of Divorce ( Free Legal Forms - Mississippi No-Fault Divorce (No Children) - Uncontested Divorce ) and then file this petition, giving it to her spouse. At that point, he only needs to sign an acknowledgement of receipt of service, correct? Any other steps to the divorce process that aren't mentioned here ( https://www.legalzoom.com/divorce-guide/divorce-process.html )?? Is there any minimum fee to have the courts handle this divorce mumbo jumbo if they are both acting pro se?

 

[Ohiogal]

She would have to SERVE her STBX and she would have to pay the filing fee.