 |
|
|
|
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
 |
|
||
| CASES OF INTEREST |
| click here to go back to the Cases of Interest |
| FAMILY LAW: PROCEDURAL ISSUES |
| Issue: Religious marriage/ Requirement of marriage license under N.J.S.A. 37:1-2 |
Issue: Religious marriage/ Requirement of marriage license under N.J.S.A. 37:1-2 |
| FARANAK YAGHOUBINEJAD, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BABAK HAGHIGHI, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION 384 N.J. Super. 339(AD 2006)894 A.2d 1173 |
| Q. Is a religious marriage ceremony performed without a marriage license absolutely void? |
| A. Yes. N.J.S.A. 37:1-10 abolished common law marriages and declared that no marriage shall be valid after the effective date of the statute unless the parties obtain a marriage license. The parties participated in a marriage ceremony performed in accordance with the Islam religion, in New Jersey, in 2001. The certificate bore a signature of the person who solemnized the marriage. The parties never obtained a marriage license. On July 15,2005, plaintiff filed a complaint for divorce. Defendant, requiring plaintiff to produce evidence of a legal marriage. N.J.S.A. 37:1-10 provides: No marriage contracted on and after December first, nineteen hundred and thirty-nine, shall be valid unless the contracting parties shall have obtained a marriage license as required by [N.J.S.A.] 37:1-2 …, and unless, also, the marriage, after license duly issued therefor, shall have been performed by or before any person, religious society, institution or organization authorized by [N.J.S.A.] 37:1-13 … to solemnize marriages; and failure in any case to comply with both prerequisites aforesaid, which shall always be construed as mandatory and not merely directory, shall render the purported marriage absolutely void. The statute accomplishes three things : 1. It abolishes common law marriage. 2. It requires that a license to marry be procured before the ceremony. 3. It requires that the marriage be solemnized by an authorized person or entity. The Supreme Court cited Dacunzo v. Edgye, 19 N.J. 443, 450, 117 A.2d 508 (1955): "it is axiomatic that a void act has no validity from the beginning, and this is a fortiori true where an act is declared 'absolutely void' by a mandatory command of a statute." N.J.S.A. 37:1-10 |
| back to the top |