Meretricious relationship is a common law marriage between two parties cohabitating without an intent to get legally married.
The validity of a meretricious relationship is determined on a case-to-case basis depending on a few factors.
Meretricious relationships are slowly becoming the norm of our society. With people abandoning traditional beliefs, marriage is no longer a requirement to have an intimate relationship.
Like a marriage, a relationship can last for years, if not decades. During the period of cohabitation, the involved parties might buy properties, take insurance policies, or even have children.
There’s not much distinction between a marriage and a meretricious relationship when things are going smoothly. However, once the relationship becomes toxic and ends, it could create legal turmoil as to how the resources are to be distributed.
When such relationships end, disputes often arise about the distribution of the properties. In such cases, courts generally have to determine whether the relationship was meretricious or not.
Appealing parties should prove that the couple considered themselves married to each other without actually doing so. Such a scenario creates confusion as to what constitutes a meretricious relationship. Let’s take a look at the legal provisions and state laws governing such domestic partnerships.
What Is Meretricious Relationship?
Meretricious relationship definition is simply a marriage-like partnership where the parties involved are not legally married.
It is also called a committed intimate relationship or a common-law marriage.
A meretricious relationship is not necessarily an invention of modern society. People have been practicing this form of domestic partnership for centuries.
Meretricious relationships came into existence when people found it difficult to host a wedding ceremony or find a priest to get them married. In general, there are five major factors to consider when determining whether a relationship is meretricious.
- Nature of relationship
- Duration of relationship
- Intent of the parties involved
- Duration of cohabitation
- Pooling of financial and other resources
The five points mentioned above are necessary to determine if the parties involved were indeed in a meretricious relationship or just two people living together. The task of determining the nature of the relationship can be tricky as there is a line between a live-in couple and a couple in a meretricious partnership.
Here, the intent of the two parties is vital as the couple should have no intention of getting married.
Meretricious Meaning In Law
Meretricious definition is seemingly attractive but with little to no value, as per Cambridge Dictionary.
As per Cornell Law School, the word meretricious is used to indicate two parties living together without a formal marital relationship.
The word originated from the Latin word “merere” which means to “earn or deserve.” The term shares its origins with similar-sounding words like merit, emeritus, and meritorious.
“Meretricious” was first used in the English language during the 17th century. The word was initially used to refer to things that appeared superficially attractive but possessed no value.
It can be used as a noun (meretricious). adverb (meretriciously), or adjective (unmeretricious).
Legal Provisions Relating To Meretricious Relationship
Meretricious relationships are not treated as marriages under the law. However, the parties involved can be granted rights enjoyed by a spouse, partly or fully.
These relationships usually fall under family law which is under the jurisdiction of the state in the US. However, there are no clear provisions relating to such relationships and any dispute is handled on a case-to-case basis.
In most cases, courts have the discretion whether or not to deem the relationship as marriage-like. If the courts determine a relationship as meretricious, the appellant is granted rights as a spouse.
There are several examples to consider when trying the understand a meretricious relationship with a legal prospect.
In the Connell Vs Francisco case of 1995, the Washington Supreme Court came up with the verdict that “when a meretricious relationship is terminated, a trial court shall equitably redistribute the properties acquired during the relationship.
Similarly, in the Pennington Vs Pennington case, the trial court initially ruled in favor of the distribution of assets equitably. The Washington Supreme Court didn’t deem the relationship as meretricious and reversed the decision of the trial court.
In doing so, the Supreme considered the following factors:
- The parties didn’t have continuous cohabitation as they lived separately twice during ten years of relationship, including once when the woman lived with a different partner for a month.
- The man was married, although separated from his wife, in the first five of the relationship.
- The man refused the woman’s repeated offer to marry.
Considering the three factors, the Washington Supreme Court ruled out that the parties involved were not in a meretricious relationship and thus reversed the trial court’s verdict to distribute the assets.
Meretricious Relationship According To States
The law relating to meretricious relationships or common law marriages differs from state to state.
For instance, Texas doesn’t recognize a meretricious relationship and, thus doesn’t grant any rights to the parties. Similarly, Georgia only recognizes common law marriages formed before 1997.
Unlike official marriages, where the parties hold a ceremony or get a certificate as proof, meretricious relationships have nothing to prove their validity. They mostly rely on the value put on the relationship by the partners or the community.
Hence, making a decision on such domestic partnerships become confusing for courts. Hence, states are slowly abandoning the concept of common law marriages and requiring statutory marriages for granting rights to spouses.
As of now, only the District of Columbia and 15 US states legally recognize meretricious relationships, including Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Rhode Island, and more.
However, even these states have put on some form of restrictions to reduce any confusion that may arise during a legal dispute.