Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Robert was killed in an accident at a construction site. P filed this wrongful death action against D, claiming she was the putative spouse of decedent. D challenged P's status as a putative spouse. Robert and Christina Ceja were wed in 1995. When Robert met P in 1999, he told P he was married but separated. In 2001, Robert filed a petition for dissolution of his marriage to Christina, and he started living with P. In September 2003, P and Robert filled out a license and certificate of marriage. The completed document was marked “0” in the space for listing decedent's “number of previous marriages” and was left blank in two other spaces asking how and when any previous marriage had been terminated. Despite knowing of Robert's marriage to Christina, P signed the “Affidavit” box in the document indicating its contents were “correct and true to the best of our knowledge and belief.” A license to marry was issued to P and Robert on September 24, 2003. Robert was still married to Christina when he and P held their wedding ceremony three days later, on September 27, 2003. On December 31, 2003, the Santa Clara County Superior Court filed a “Notice of Entry of Judgment” and mailed it to the home of P and Robert. The notice stated that a judgment for dissolution of the marriage between decedent and Christina had been entered on December 26, 2003, and that the judgment was effective as of the date the judgment was filed. The notice also contained a statement-which appeared in a separate box and was printed in boldface type-warning that “Neither party may remarry until the effective date of the termination of marital status.” In January 2004, P faxed a copy of this court document to Robert's ironworkers’ union so she could be added to Robert's medical insurance. The fatal accident occurred over three years later. D moved for summary judgment in that P did not have the requisite “good faith belief” that her marriage to Robert was valid. P argued there were triable issues of material fact regarding her status as a putative spouse. P claims she did not know what happened about the divorce because Robert would never discuss the subject. She simply signed the marriage certificate without reading it. Although she faxed the final divorce documents, she did not read them. Following their well-attended marriage ceremony, P held herself out as decedent's wife “to all persons at all times.” She changed her last name, and both wore wedding rings, shared a joint checking account, lived together in the same house as husband and wife, and handled their taxes as married but filing separately. P posits that would not have had her wedding on September 27, 2003, had she not believed she would have a legal and valid marriage. Had she realized at any time that her marriage was invalid, she and decedent “would have simply redone the ceremony.” D’s motion was granted because the court applied an objective test. P appealed. The Court of Appeal reversed. The court held section 377.60's requirement of a good faith belief refers to the alleged putative spouse's subjective state of mind. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co