Age v. Age
2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 23, 340 S.W.3d 88, 2011 WL 339196 (2011)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A determination by a religious tribunal, such as an annulment by the Roman Catholic Church, has no legal effect on the validity of a civil marriage or a subsequent decree of dissolution under state law. Civil courts will not interfere with or be bound by ecclesiastical decisions regarding matters of faith and marriage.
Facts:
- Steven Michael Age and Janet Louise Reid were married on December 21, 1973.
- The couple was married for 33 years and had two children, who were adults at the time of the dispute.
- During the marriage, Reid was primarily a homemaker and her annual income never exceeded $7,000, while Age earned between $153,000 and $188,000 per year at Abbott Laboratories.
- On April 11, 2008, the parties executed a settlement agreement related to their divorce, in which Reid waived her right to spousal maintenance.
- Following the entry of the civil divorce decree, Reid sought and obtained a theological annulment of the marriage from the Roman Catholic Church.
- Age alleged that statements Reid made to obtain the religious annulment proved she had married him solely for personal and financial security, which he characterized as fraud.
Procedural Posture:
- Janet Louise Reid filed a petition for dissolution of marriage against Steven Michael Age in the Oldham Circuit Court.
- A decree of dissolution was entered by the trial court on June 3, 2008, incorporating the parties' settlement agreement.
- More than a year later, on August 10, 2009, Age filed a motion in the trial court under CR 60.02 to set aside the judgment on the grounds of fraud and new evidence.
- The Oldham Circuit Court entered an order on September 3, 2009, denying Age's motion to set aside the decree.
- The trial court also denied Age's subsequent motion to reconsider its ruling.
- Separately, the trial court found the settlement agreement's waiver of maintenance unconscionable and, in an order on October 22, 2009, awarded maintenance to Reid.
- Age, as appellant, appealed the trial court's denial of his CR 60.02 motion and its subsequent maintenance award to the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
- Reid, as appellee and cross-appellant, filed a cross-appeal challenging the adequacy of the maintenance award and the trial court's rulings on attorney fees.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a religious annulment of a marriage by the Roman Catholic Church constitute fraud or new evidence under Kentucky's Civil Rule 60.02, thereby requiring a civil court to set aside a previously entered decree of dissolution?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Clayton
No. A religious annulment does not constitute fraud or new evidence sufficient to set aside a civil divorce decree. Civil courts must decline jurisdiction over ecclesiastical matters, and a determination by a religious body regarding the validity of a marriage has no bearing on the legal status of that marriage under civil law. The court reasoned that under the doctrine of separation of church and state, as established in precedents like Watson v. Jones, civil courts are incompetent to judge matters of faith and religious doctrine. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church's decision to annul the marriage is legally irrelevant to the civil dissolution. Additionally, the court found Age's motion under CR 60.02(b) for newly discovered evidence was untimely as it was filed more than one year after the judgment. It also concluded that marrying for financial security does not rise to the level of fraud involving the 'essentials of marriage' required to invalidate a civil marriage under Kentucky statute KRS 403.120.
Concurring - Judge Thompson
No. The concurring opinion agrees with the result but argues the appeal should have been summarily dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. Kentucky statute KRS 22A.020(3) explicitly prohibits any appellate review of the portion of a judgment that dissolves a marriage. Citing precedent like Clements v. Harris, the concurrence emphasizes that this rule serves the strong public policy of ensuring the finality of divorce decrees. Allowing such decrees to be set aside could have severe consequences, such as rendering children born of the marriage retroactively illegitimate. Therefore, Age's motion and subsequent appeal were invalid on their face and should be considered frivolous.
Analysis:
This case strongly reaffirms the principle of judicial non-intervention in religious matters, particularly in the context of family law. It establishes a clear precedent in Kentucky that a religious annulment cannot be used as a legal basis to attack the validity of a civil marriage or to vacate a final divorce decree. The decision protects the finality of civil judgments and prevents the entanglement of civil courts in ecclesiastical law and doctrine. This ruling will likely prevent future litigants from attempting to use post-divorce religious proceedings to undo their civil obligations.
