Elia-Warnken v. Elia
972 N.E.2d 17
Mass.2012Background
- Plaintiff Elia-Warnken entered a Vermont civil union on April 19, 2003, which remained undissolved.
- Plaintiff and defendant Elia were married in Massachusetts on October 17, 2005.
- Plaintiff filed for divorce in April 2009; defendant counterclaimed; discovery revealed the undissolved civil union.
- In March 2010, defendant moved to dismiss the divorce claim on the ground that the Massachusetts marriage was void.
- Massachusetts recognizes same-sex marriage and rules that civil unions beyond 2009 are not automatically converted to marriages, but may be treated as equal in relevant respects.
- Vermont law in 2000 established civil unions; 2009 legislation allowed same-sex marriage but did not convert existing civil unions; undissolved civil unions bar marriage to another party.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Vermont civil unions are the functional equivalent of marriage in Massachusetts | Civil unions are not guaranteed to be treated as marriages in MA. | Civil unions provide rights and obligations equal to marriage and should be recognized as equivalent. | Yes; Vermont civil union constitutes the equivalent of marriage for MA purposes. |
| Effect of an undissolved Vermont civil union on MA marriage validity | MA marriage would be valid despite an undissolved Vermont civil union. | A party to an undissolved civil union cannot lawfully enter a new marriage in MA. | A party with an undissolved civil union cannot marry another; the MA marriage is void ab initio. |
| Application of comity to recognize out-of-state civil unions as marriages | Massachusetts should refrain from recognizing out-of-state civil unions as marriages. | Comity supports recognizing equivalent out-of-state civil unions to prevent discrimination and chaos. | Massachusetts recognizes Vermont civil unions as equivalent to marriage under comity. |
| Scope of Massachusetts polygamy statutes when recognizing civil unions as marriages | Polygamy statutes do not apply to a non-spouse in a Vermont civil union. | Polygamy statutes apply to any spousal relationship, including civil unions treated as marriages. | Civil union spouse constitutes a spousal relationship; MA polygamy statutes render the MA marriage void. |
Key Cases Cited
- Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194 (Vt. 1999) (rights and protections for same-sex couples; equality of rights)
- Miller-Jenkins v. Miller-Jenkins, 180 Vt. 441 (Vt. 2006) (civil unions aim for equality with marriage)
- Goodridge v. Department of Pub. Health, 440 Mass. 309 (Mass. 2003) (recognition of same-sex marriage; gender-neutral reading of related provisions)
- Cote-Whitacre v. Department of Pub. Health, 446 Mass. 350 (Mass. 2006) (comity and recognition of out-of-state laws; equal treatment of legal distinctions)
- Commonwealth v. Lane, 113 Mass. 458 (Mass. 1873) (recognition of out-of-state marriages under public policy)
- Commonwealth v. Mash, 7 Met. 472 (Mass. 1844) (polygamy prohibition; public policy against multiple spouses)
- DeLeonardis v. Page, 188 Vt. 94 (Vt. 2010) (undivided civil unions; applicability to civil unions and marriages)
- Opinions of the Justices, 440 Mass. 1201 (Mass. 2004) (discussion of civil unions as an alternative to marriage)