Also known as: de facto marriage · de facto married · common law marriage · common-law marriage
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An informal marital relationship recognized in certain jurisdictions when parties exchange consents, cohabit, and hold themselves out publicly as spouses. No ceremony or license is required. Capacity to marry must exist and any later-removed impediment validates the marriage from the date of removal.
Dustin Donovan and Dorothy Daniels agreed to live as spouses and moved into an apartment together. They opened a joint bank account and introduced each other as husband and wife to neighbors and vendors. After separation Dustin sought property division as a spouse in a jurisdiction recognizing such marriages.
Dolores Diaz and Danielle Dixon began living together after Dolores obtained a divorce. They held themselves out as spouses for years. A court later recognized their marriage as valid from the date the prior marriage ended.
Daniel Diaz and Darius Dixon formed a common law marriage in a state that still recognizes them. They later moved to a state that abolished such marriages. The second state treated their marriage as valid for all purposes.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A couple lived together for fifteen years, raised children, and presented themselves as married to the community. One partner sought an equal share of accumulated assets upon separation. The court imposed marital property rules because the jurisdiction recognized their de facto marriage.
Two partners lived together for years and pooled earnings without marrying. One sought recovery for services and contributions after the relationship ended. The court enforced express or implied agreements because the jurisdiction recognized their de facto marriage.
An interracial couple lived together openly as spouses. State law criminalized their cohabitation but not that of same-race couples. The Court struck down the statute as violating equal protection because the jurisdiction recognized their de facto marriage.
The parties must exchange consents to a permanent marital relationship, live together as spouses, and hold themselves out publicly as married through actions such as joint accounts or common names.
Supporting sources
Yes. An explicit cohabitation agreement stating the parties do not intend to marry absent a formal ceremony negates the consent element even if later conduct suggests holding out.
Supporting sources
Yes. A valid de facto marriage created under the law of one state receives recognition in other states regardless of whether those states still permit new ones.
Supporting sources
Most states recognize the marriage as valid from the date the impediment is removed provided the other elements of consent, cohabitation, and holding out were already present.
Supporting sources
…leads couples to choose a nonmarital relationship; many unmarried couples may also incorrectly believe that the doctrine of common law marriage prevails in California, and thus that they are in fact married. Consequently we conclude that the mere fact that a couple have not participated in a valid marriage ceremony cannot serve as…