In Re Marriage of Ramirez
165 Cal. App. 4th 751, 81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 180 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A marriage may be annulled for fraud when one party enters the marriage with a concealed, preexisting intent to continue an ongoing extramarital sexual relationship, as this deception goes to the essence of the marital obligation of fidelity.
Facts:
- Jorge L. Ramirez, an immigrant seeking legal U.S. residence, and Lilia Llamas participated in a religious marriage ceremony in California in 1999.
- The parties later learned their 1999 marriage was invalid because Lilia's prior divorce was not yet final and the Mexican marriage certificate created issues for Jorge's immigration status.
- Prior to the parties' second marriage, Jorge began a sexual affair with Lilia's sister, Blanca.
- In 2001, Jorge and Lilia remarried in a legally valid ceremony, obtaining a California marriage license.
- At the time of the 2001 marriage, Jorge secretly intended to continue his affair with Blanca.
- In 2004, after Lilia assisted him with his final immigration paperwork, Jorge asked Lilia for a divorce, revealing he was in love with someone else.
- Lilia later discovered the other woman was her sister, Blanca, after overhearing a phone conversation between Jorge and Blanca.
Procedural Posture:
- Jorge Ramirez filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in the trial court.
- Lilia Llamas filed a response and a cross-petition requesting a judgment of nullity of the marriage.
- Following a bifurcated trial on the marriage's status, the trial court found the 2001 marriage was void due to fraud and declared Lilia a putative spouse.
- Jorge Ramirez, as the appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the California Court of Appeals, Fourth District.
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 spouse's concealed intent at the time of marriage to continue an existing extramarital affair constitute fraud sufficient to annul the marriage?
Opinions:
Majority - Ramirez, P. J.
Yes. A spouse's concealed intent at the time of marriage to continue an existing extramarital affair constitutes fraud sufficient to annul the marriage. The court reasoned that for a marriage to be annulled for fraud, the fraud must go to the 'very essence of the marriage relation.' Citing Family Code § 720, which establishes 'fidelity' as a core contractual obligation of marriage, the court held that a secret intention not to honor this duty from the outset directly relates to the sexual aspects of marriage. The court found that Jorge's secret plan to maintain his affair with Lilia's sister was a deception that undermined a central pillar of the marital contract, thus justifying the annulment.
Dissenting - Gaut, J.
No. A spouse's infidelity alone should not serve as a basis for annulment on the ground of fraud. The dissent argues that the majority misinterprets precedent, particularly Schaub v. Schaub, which involved a conspiracy for financial gain in addition to infidelity. The dissenting judge expressed concern that this new holding would have unintended repercussions, encouraging unnecessary litigation over property rights and making annulment, which should be an exception, more common than dissolution of marriage.
Analysis:
This decision significantly broadens the scope of fraud sufficient for a marriage annulment in California. Prior precedent typically required fraud related to procreation, consummation of the marriage, or child-rearing. By elevating the marital duty of fidelity to a level where its fraudulent concealment at inception can void the marriage, the court establishes a new precedent. This ruling allows a party who was deceived about their spouse's commitment to monogamy at the time of marriage to seek an annulment rather than just a divorce, which has different legal consequences, particularly regarding property division.
