BETEMARIAM v. Said
48 So. 3d 121, 2010 WL 4628506, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 17666 (2010)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Virginia law, the statutory requirement to obtain a marriage license is mandatory, and the failure to obtain a license prior to a solemnization ceremony renders the marriage void ab initio, regardless of the parties' belief in its validity.
Facts:
- In 2000, Blene Betemariam and Dr. Binor Said began living together while separated from their respective spouses.
- Betemariam gave birth to the couple's twin children in 2001.
- After both parties finalized their divorces in 2002, they planned to marry.
- On January 1, 2004, the parties participated in an Islamic marriage ceremony in Alexandria, Virginia, conducted by an Imam.
- The couple received a religious marriage certificate but never obtained a civil marriage license before or after the ceremony.
- After the ceremony, the parties moved to Florida, held themselves out as a married couple, purchased property jointly as husband and wife, and opened joint bank accounts.
- Betemariam was the primary caregiver for the children, who attended a private academy for approximately five years before the parties separated.
Procedural Posture:
- In 2007, Betemariam filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in a Florida trial court.
- Said filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the parties were never legally married.
- Betemariam amended her petition to add a count for equitable relief in the event the marriage was deemed invalid.
- Said filed a counter-petition for paternity, visitation, and child support.
- The trial court entered a final judgment finding that the parties were never legally married and that it lacked jurisdiction to consider equitable distribution or alimony.
- The trial court also established paternity, set child support, and ordered the partition of the parties' property.
- Betemariam filed a motion for rehearing, requesting the court to order Said to pay for the children's private school tuition, which the trial court denied.
- Betemariam (appellant) appealed the trial court's final judgment to the Florida District Court of Appeal.
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 the failure to obtain a marriage license prior to a religious ceremony render the marriage void under Virginia law, thereby precluding a court from awarding alimony or equitable distribution?
Opinions:
Majority - Warner, J.
Yes, the failure to obtain a marriage license renders the marriage void. Under the principle of lex loci celebrationis, Virginia law governs the validity of the marriage. Virginia Code § 20-13, which states that every marriage 'shall' be under a license, is a mandatory requirement. Citing the precedent of Offield v. Davis, the court reasoned that Virginia's statutory scheme abrogated common law marriage, meaning no marriage is valid unless it is licensed and solemnized as prescribed by statute. The statutory provision that cures certain defects in a marriage (Va. Code § 20-31) applies only to defects in the officiant's authority or imperfections in a license; it cannot cure the 'complete non-existence of the license itself.' Therefore, because the parties were never legally married, the trial court correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction to award alimony or equitable distribution. However, the court found the trial judge erred by not ordering Said to pay for the children's private school, as he had the ability to pay, it was in line with the family's standard of living, and the issue was tried by consent.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms the strict, formal requirements for creating a valid marriage in jurisdictions that have statutorily abolished common-law marriage. It underscores that a party's subjective belief or intent to be married is insufficient to overcome the failure to comply with a mandatory licensing statute. The case serves as a critical precedent distinguishing between a religious union and a legal one, clarifying that without adherence to civil formalities, parties are denied access to marital remedies like alimony and equitable distribution. For future cases, this ruling solidifies that statutory cures for defective marriages typically do not apply to the complete absence of a foundational requirement like a license.
