step 1. SYLLABUS
Panama has actually acknowledged prominent-laws marriage while the 1946, additionally the State out-of Ca comprehends just like the appropriate a marriage developed away from Ca that might be legitimate from the legislation from where the couple developed the marriage.
2. View
Whether the Panamanian prominent-law marriage regarding Rene and you will Gladys is valid for the purpose out of determining if or not Gladys try entitled to separated companion professionals on the fresh new list of Rene.
Sure. The condition of Ca create recognize an average-law relationship out of Gladys and you may Rene as the common-law anian rules. As the marriage live more ten years, it match the latest years requirement for separated lover masters.
Into , Gladys (Claimant) applied for advantages because divorced mate of the number owner (NH), Rene , lower than Title II of your own Social Defense Act (Act). For her application, Claimant indicated that she first started living with the new NH due to the fact spouse and girlfriend inside Santa Cruz, Panama from inside the 1971. She reported that she plus the NH had an understanding that they certainly were way of life together in keeping-laws relationship. She along with stated that they didn’t have a great ceremonial relationships during the time because they couldn’t afford one, however, which they believed that they certainly were a good. Into March Beatriz , the original man of the NH and you will Claimant, was born in Panama.
On June eight, 1973, Claimant in addition to NH applied for a wedding license and you can had been civilly married in america District Legal toward Region of Canal Region inside Panama. Pursuing the civil marriage, Claimant as well as the NH relocated to Lawn Grove, California. Claimant revealed that Honest, the second man of your own NH and you can Claimant, came into this world with the March in California.
The new Advanced Judge out of Ca, Lime County issued a last judgment of the dissolution of your marriage of Claimant therefore the NH on may 18, 1981.
Beatriz registered good “Report Out-of Marriage” to get the girl mother’s app for separated companion advantages. Rene reported that she lived having both Claimant while the NH while in the the woman young people and you may understood these to end up being wife and husband. She revealed that Claimant https://datingmentor.org/uk-romanian-dating/ plus the NH existed along with her out-of 1971 so you’re able to 1973 when you look at the Santa Cruz, Panama, and from 1973 so you’re able to 1981 in the Garden Grove, California.
The brand new Work brings one a separated girlfriend away from a covered individual is eligible to possess divorced companion insurance rates pros when the she was validly married on the covered for at least a decade, achieves ages 62, is not already married, and you may documents a credit card applicatoin. Societal Cover Act § 202(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. § 402(b)(1); see 20 C.F.R. § (criteria getting separated mate masters); System Surgery Tips guide Program (POMS) RS 0 (relationships and you may entitlement conditions getting separated partner gurus); look for as well as Social Security Handbook §§ 307, 311.
From inside the deciding the fresh validity out-of a marriage, the fresh department is applicable legislation of your condition where in fact the insured personal is domiciled at that time new claimant registered the application form to own gurus. Social Safeguards Act § 216(h)(1)(A)(i); 20 C.F.Roentgen. § ; select as well as 20 C.F.Roentgen. § (defining “permanent household” while the “judge domicile”). As well, new department can be applied the law of one’s county where in fact the insured individual is actually domiciled to determine whether or not a valid popular-rules matrimony is actually contracted beyond your You. Find POMS 0 (growth of preferred-rules matrimony outside the United states). Here, Claimant while the NH was in fact a good. NH is domiciled within the Ca during the time of Claimant’s application. Thus, Ca legislation decides if or not Claimant is actually validly a.
No California statute specifically addresses the validity of a a; however, the California Family Code provides that “[a] marriage contracted outside this state that would be valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the marriage was contracted is valid in this state.” Cal. Fam. Code § 308; see People v. Badgett, 895 P.2d 877, 897 (Cal. 1995) (discussing and applying Family Code § 308 to determine validity of purported common law . Jur. 2d. ) (“[t]he general signal is the fact that the validity out-of a wedding was influenced by regulations of lay in which it is contracted, otherwise notable. For this reason, a wedding which is good beneath the legislation of state otherwise nation in which it is contracted will normally be approved as legitimate.”). Consequently, a beneficial anian legislation might possibly be recognized by the condition of Ca.
