Maynard v. Hill

Supreme Court of the United States · 1888 · Family Law

Family LawDivorceMarriageTerritorial legislative powerProperty rightslegislative divorceterritorial legislaturemarriage as status

Facts

The Oregon Territorial Assembly passed an act on December 22, 1852, declaring the marriage between David S. Maynard and his wife dissolved. At the time, David was a resident of the Territory, and he later remarried. The donation act gave land only to a settler who resided on and cultivated the land for four consecutive years, and when the divorce was granted those conditions had not yet been completed. The first wife claimed that despite the divorce she remained entitled to half of the donation claim because the settlement had been made by her husband as a married man.

Issue

Was the Oregon Territorial Assembly's special act dissolving the marriage a valid exercise of legislative power, and if so, did that divorce cut off the wife's claimed right to one-half of the donation land claim? Also, did such an act violate the constitutional or statutory protections against impairment of contracts?

Rule

Granting a divorce is a rightful subject of legislation unless directly prohibited by controlling constitutional law. Marriage, though founded on consent, is a social relation or status rather than a contract within the meaning of the constitutional ban on laws impairing the obligation of contracts. A divorce terminates all marital rights not already vested, so a former spouse cannot claim a later-acquired property interest that would have arisen only from continuation of the marriage relation.

🔒

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.

In 1855, the territorial assembly of New Mexico passed a special act dissolving the marriage of Caleb Morton, a resident of Santa Fe, and Hannah Morton, who had remained in Kentucky. The territory's organic act granted power over all rightful subjects of legislation and contained no express ban on legislative divorces.

If Hannah challenges the act on the ground that only courts may dissolve marriages, which is the strongest response?

Explanation. The majority held that, in the absence of direct prohibition, granting divorces is a rightful subject of legislation. The Court looked to long historical practice and public acquiescence, not to rigid legislative-versus-judicial labels. Thus a territorial legislature with authority over rightful subjects of legislation could dissolve a marriage by special act when one party was a resident.