Back v. Back
148 Iowa 223 (1910)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A relationship of affinity, such as that between a man and his wife's daughter, terminates upon the dissolution of the marriage that created it, at least where there is no surviving issue of that marriage. Consequently, a subsequent marriage between the parties is not prohibited by incest statutes.
Facts:
- In 1890, William Back married Mrs. Dirke, a widow who had a daughter (the plaintiff) from a previous marriage.
- No children were born to William Back and Mrs. Dirke during their marriage.
- In 1900, Mrs. Dirke obtained a divorce from William Back.
- In 1904, William Back married the plaintiff, his former wife's daughter.
- William Back and the plaintiff had four children together and lived as husband and wife.
- Approximately two years after the plaintiff's marriage to Back, her mother (Mrs. Dirke) died.
- William Back died in 1906, and the plaintiff, as his widow, sought to have exempt property set apart to her from his estate.
Procedural Posture:
- The plaintiff applied to the trial court to have exempt property set aside for her as the widow of William Back.
- The defendant, representing the estate, resisted the application, arguing the marriage was incestuous and void.
- The plaintiff demurred to the defendant's answer, which was overruled by the trial court.
- The plaintiff then filed a reply; the defendant demurred to the reply, and the trial court sustained the defendant's demurrer.
- Following a trial on stipulated facts, the trial court entered judgment for the defendant, ruling that the plaintiff was never the legal wife of the decedent and was not entitled to recover as his widow.
- The plaintiff (appellant) appealed the trial court's judgment to the Supreme Court of Iowa.
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 marriage between a man and the daughter of his divorced wife violate a state incest statute that prohibits a man from marrying his 'wife's daughter'?
Opinions:
Majority - McClain, J.
No, a marriage between a man and the daughter of his divorced wife does not violate the state's incest statute. The relationship of affinity created by marriage terminates when the marriage that created it is dissolved. The statutory term 'wife's daughter' defines a relationship based on affinity, which exists only during the continuance of the marriage between the man and the daughter's mother. Since the marriage between William Back and the plaintiff's mother was terminated by divorce before Back married the plaintiff, she was no longer his 'wife's daughter' within the meaning of the penal statute. Therefore, the subsequent marriage was valid.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the temporal limits of relationships by affinity for the purpose of incest statutes, distinguishing them from permanent relationships of consanguinity. It establishes that affinity-based marriage prohibitions do not survive the dissolution of the underlying marriage, particularly by divorce. This precedent narrows the scope of incest laws, affecting the validity of subsequent marriages and related inheritance rights. The court intentionally leaves open the question of whether the result would be different if there had been surviving issue from the first marriage, a qualification noted in other jurisdictions.
