In Re the Estate of Phifer
629 p.2d 808 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To establish a common law marriage under Oklahoma law, the party asserting the marriage must prove by clear and convincing evidence that there was a mutual agreement to be married, a permanent and exclusive relationship, cohabitation, and that the parties publicly held themselves out as husband and wife.
Facts:
- Treva K. Walters and Henry Phifer cohabitated on a part-time basis for approximately four to five years.
- On three or four occasions, Phifer referred to Walters as his wife and introduced her as "Kay Phifer" at medical conventions.
- Walters and Phifer were separated for a period of several months during the summer of 1978 when Walters returned to Texas.
- Throughout their relationship, Phifer filed his income tax returns as a single individual.
- Phifer executed mortgages, deeds, and other business documents consistently representing himself as an unmarried man.
- Walters and Phifer maintained separate bank accounts and never held a joint account.
- While living with Phifer, Walters applied for and obtained a beer license in her own name, Kay Walters.
Procedural Posture:
- Following the death of Henry Phifer, Valerie Joe Phifer Dickenson was appointed administratrix of his estate.
- Treva K. Walters filed an application in the district court seeking to establish her priority as the surviving common law spouse.
- The district court, as the trial court, held an evidentiary hearing.
- The trial court found that Ms. Walters had failed to meet her burden of proof and denied her application.
- Ms. Walters, as appellant, appealed the trial court's decision to the Oklahoma Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Under Oklahoma law, has a party established the existence of a common law marriage by clear and convincing evidence when there are only isolated instances of being held out as a married couple, which are contradicted by substantial evidence of the couple maintaining separate legal and financial identities?
Opinions:
Majority - Boydston, J.
No. A party fails to establish a common law marriage when the evidence of a marital relationship is equivocal and outweighed by clear evidence that the parties did not consider themselves married. The burden is on the party asserting the marriage to prove all its elements by clear and convincing evidence. Here, Ms. Walters failed to meet this high burden. The few isolated instances where the deceased referred to her as his wife were not sufficient to establish a community-wide reputation of marriage. This evidence was equivocal and directly contradicted by substantial documentary evidence, such as tax returns, deeds, and mortgages, where the deceased consistently identified himself as a single man. Furthermore, the couple's maintenance of separate finances and Ms. Walters' own testimony that their unmarried status was a 'deliberately established course of conduct' undermined the essential element of a mutual agreement to be married.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high evidentiary standard required to prove a common law marriage in Oklahoma. It clarifies that a claimant cannot cherry-pick isolated instances of a couple acting married, especially when those instances are contradicted by a consistent pattern of conduct in legal and financial affairs indicating an unmarried status. The case serves as a precedent that courts will weigh objective, documentary evidence, such as tax filings and property deeds, more heavily than anecdotal testimony about informal introductions. This makes it significantly more difficult for a surviving partner to establish marital rights to an estate where the couple deliberately avoided the legal formalities of marriage.
