MERETRICIOUS - Definition and synonyms of meretricious in the English dictionary
As part of showing the relationship similar to a marriage, the parties should be would not be enough, or occasional overnight company is not enough. A meretricious relationship is a "stable, marital-like relationship where. as a “meretricious relationship” or a “committed intimate relationship,” but not former partner fall into the definition of a “committed intimate relationship” the. If the court finds that a relationship meets the meretricious definition, then the . We also owned a business together but all the debt was in my name. He left me.
State laws vary in defining cohabitation. Some states have statutes which make cohabitation a criminal offense under adultery laws. Under one state's law, cohabitation means "regularly residing with an adult of the same or opposite sex, if the parties hold themselves out as a couple, and regardless of whether the relationship confers a financial benefit on the party receiving alimony. Proof of sexual relations is admissible but not required to prove cohabitation.
However, adults who voluntarily live together and engage in sexual relations may enter into a contract to establish the respective rights and duties of the parties with respect to their earnings and the property acquired from their earnings during the nonmarital relationship.
While parties to a nonmarital cohabitation agreement cannot lawfully contract to pay for the performance of sexual services, they may agree to pool their earnings and hold all property acquired during the relationship separately, jointly or to be governed by community property laws. They may also agree to pool only part of their earnings and property, form a partnership or joint venture or joint enterprise, or hold property as joint tenants or tenants in common, or agree to any other arrangement.
Other legal issues that may be affect cohabiting couples inlude estate planning and medical care. Generally, someone who cohabits with another is not considered an heir under the law or have the same rights to make medical care decisions in the same manner as a spouse.
Therefore, unmarried cohabitants may consider estate planning and power of attorneys in addition to having a nonmarital agreement. In some cases of people who formerly cohabited, courts have found a trust created in property of one person who cohabits with another, whereby the property is deemed held for the benefit of their domestic partner.
Thus, one of these elements, namely sexual intercourse or shared living expenses, must be proven in addition to the element of an open and continuous cohabitation. Open and Continuous Cohabitation Cohabitation must be open and continuous, not secret and hidden, and akin to the living arrangements of married people. Since the constitutionality of O. As the cases cited above set forth, periodic physical interludes are not proof of open and continuous cohabitation.
The ruling of the trial court in Donaldson—that having an unrelated male guest past midnight for more than four nights out of any night period would be tantamount to being in a meretricious relationship—was considered unreasonably intrusive and against the holding in Hathcock.
Cohabitation Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.
So, even if Hubert has airtight evidence that Beau has spent the night with Winona on multiple occasions, that alone will not be enough to meet his burden of proof.
Receiving mail at a given address is not the same as residing at the address continuously. To terminate alimony based on the sexual intercourse element, there must be actual proof of sexual intercourse by a preponderance of the evidence. The Supreme Court of Georgia has also recognized that, without proof of continuous cohabitation, proof of sexual intercourse alone will not be sufficient to justify termination of alimony under O.
Daniels,8 the relationship in question had resulted in the birth of a child. The Court held, however: Therefore, the relationship fails to meet the standard authorizing a modification of permanent alimony under O. In the alternative, if sexual intercourse cannot be proven, a court can terminate alimony if the alimony payor can establish that the alimony recipient shares the expenses of cohabitation shared payments of rent, mortgage, utilities, yard maintenance, food, etc.
Under Hathcock, receiving from, giving to or sharing with the co-inhabitant the expenses of cohabitation will be sufficient to show the existence of a meretricious relationship.
- The Line Between Marriage and Cohabitation in Washington State
- Synonyms and antonyms of meretricious in the English dictionary of synonyms
- Did You Know?
Coupled with proof of open and continuous cohabitation, this would present a valid claim to take before a court to seek termination of the alimony.
Below are some additional considerations to be taken into account. Other Considerations Even if you are able to establish both prongs of the live-in lover law, there are some other things to consider before bringing an action to modify or terminate alimony under this statute.
The Court Has Discretion Courts are not required to terminate alimony even if a party proves all of the elements of the live-in lover statute by a preponderance of the evidence.
Winona may become disabled and struggle financially, whereas Hubert is financially well heeled. Other family members may be financially dependent on Winona. Living in a meretricious relationship with another prior to entry of the final divorce decree will not serve to prove the elements of the live-in lover statute, unless of course one proves that the meretricious cohabitation started before entry of the divorce and continued after entry of the final divorce decree.
If Hubert were to find out that after he and Winona separated, but before they were divorced, Winona had been living with Beau and was also having sex or sharing living expenses with Beau, this would not be grounds to modify or terminate his alimony under O. No Recoupment of Alimony Already Paid In an action to terminate alimony under the live-in lover statute, a plaintiff may not recoup any alimony already paid even if the court finds that the defendant cohabited openly and continuously in a meretricious relationship.
The trial court found that she was not cohabitating openly, continuously and meretriciously at the time of the hearing, but imposed a self-executing termination of her alimony if at any time in the future she had male company past midnight more than four times per month. The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed, holding that the trial court could not retroactively terminate alimony during the four months that the wife was meretriciously cohabitating with the third party. The Court held that the self-executing four night per month limit was unauthorized and not in accordance with prior holdings that require that modification or termination under O.
Having occasional overnight guests is not sufficient proof of such a relationship. On remand, the trial court in Donaldson was not permitted to order disgorgement by the former wife of alimony she had received while meretriciously cohabitating because that would be an impermissible retroactive modification.
Because the trial court found that the wife was not currently in a relationship within the meaning of O. Even if you can prove continuous cohabitation, unless you have an admission of sexual intercourse or a legally obtained video or photographs, you will need to focus on proof of shared expenses of cohabitation.Meretricious Relationships In Washington State