In re Estate of Duval

Supreme Court of South Dakota · 2010 · Family Law

Family LawCommon-law marriageConflict of lawsInheritancecommon-law marriageforeign marriage recognitiondomicileOklahoma law

Facts

Duval and Hargrave lived together beginning in 1994, spent summers in South Dakota and winters in Mexico, and bought a home together in Nuevo Leon, Mexico, as husband and wife. They never had a formal marriage ceremony, and Hargrave testified that although they discussed one, they decided against it because they felt married and held themselves out as husband and wife. After Duval was injured in Mexico in 2005, Hargrave took him to Oklahoma for rehabilitation and they later spent additional time there. The circuit court found that Duval had referred to Hargrave as his wife on a tax return form, named her as a beneficiary on a VA health benefits application, and executed a power of attorney in her favor.

Issue

Whether South Dakota should recognize Hargrave as Duval's surviving spouse based on an alleged common-law marriage formed while they were in Mexico or Oklahoma. More specifically, whether South Dakota requires domicile in the foreign jurisdiction to recognize such a marriage, whether a Nuevo Leon concubinage is equivalent to a common-law marriage, and whether Hargrave proved a valid Oklahoma common-law marriage.

Rule

Under SDCL 25-1-38, South Dakota recognizes a marriage contracted outside the state if it is valid under the law of the jurisdiction where it was contracted, and domicile in that jurisdiction is not required. However, the relationship must actually constitute a marriage under that jurisdiction's law. For Oklahoma common-law marriage, the alleging party must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) a mutual agreement or declaration of intent to marry, (2) cohabitation, and (3) publicly holding themselves out as husband and wife.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Leah Benton and Marco Silva lived in Rapid City, South Dakota, for years. During a four-month work assignment in Oklahoma City, they satisfied every requirement for a valid Oklahoma common-law marriage, then returned to South Dakota, where Marco later died intestate.

In a South Dakota probate dispute, Marco's siblings argue the marriage should not be recognized because Leah and Marco were never domiciled in Oklahoma. How should the court rule?

Explanation. South Dakota recognizes a marriage contracted outside the state if it is valid under the law of the jurisdiction where contracted. The majority specifically rejected a domicile requirement. So if Leah and Marco actually formed a valid Oklahoma common-law marriage, South Dakota would recognize it even though they remained domiciled in South Dakota.