T.Schiavo vs M.Schiavo=annulement

[archangel]

:bat:
In reference to the Terri Schiavo case...I do not understand why Terri's parents and or the State of Florida has not filed charges against Mr.Schiavo for adultery and bigomy.
He is and has been living with his girlfriend for over seven years and has two children with her...which becomes under definition...marriage under common law...They could then file for an immediate annulement of the marriage on Terri's behalf...The court could then appoint Terri's parents as her guardian...problem solved! :bangheads

In closing I also truly believe that a investigation into Terri's demise should be initiated as to the actual cause of her condition..I have a strong belief that her husband Michael could very well be the cause..this is based on his continued persistence to end her life,even though he could easily sign over guardianship to her parents..He could also file for divorce which I am sure would be granted...whats up with this?

 

[5stringJeff]

If only it were that easy... because you are right, the husband has certainly moved on.

 

[ReillyT]

:bat:
In reference to the Terri Schiavo case...I do not understand why Terri's parents and or the State of Florida has not filed charges against Mr.Schiavo for adultery and bigomy.
He is and has been living with his girlfriend for over seven years and has two children with her...which becomes under definition...marriage under common law...They could then file for an immediate annulement of the marriage on Terri's behalf...The court could then appoint Terri's parents as her guardian...problem solved! :bangheads

You can't file charges against someone for adultery. It isn't a crime and would only be a basis for divorce if Terri indicated she wanted a divorce, which she cannot do. Because she is incapacitated, I suppose it might be possible for her guardian to file for divorce on her behalf, but her guardian is her husband.
My guess is that common law marriage presupposes that both parties are single and that no common law marriage takes effect if one of the parties are married. So no bigomy.

 

[no1tovote4]

:bat:
In reference to the Terri Schiavo case...I do not understand why Terri's parents and or the State of Florida has not filed charges against Mr.Schiavo for adultery and bigomy.
He is and has been living with his girlfriend for over seven years and has two children with her...which becomes under definition...marriage under common law...They could then file for an immediate annulement of the marriage on Terri's behalf...The court could then appoint Terri's parents as her guardian...problem solved! :bangheads

It would depend on the law in that state. In CO one does not divorce for cause, any person in the marriage can divorce anybody for any reason whatsoever, cause doesn't come into the issue. So if the law is the same in FL, Terry's family could not begin divorce proceedings if they too are a No Fault State. If they are an at fault state where one has to have a reason for divorce they should be able to sue for gaurdianship based on bigamy or adultery, once they won gaurdianship they could then sue for divorce on her behalf. However I am sure that a lawyer was asked and a difinitive answer returned on the status of the marriage regardless of his philandering.

 

[archangel]

You can't file charges against someone for adultery. It isn't a crime and would only be a basis for divorce if Terri indicated she wanted a divorce, which she cannot do. Because she is incapacitated, I suppose it might be possible for her guardian to file for divorce on her behalf, but her guardian is her husband.
My guess is that common law marriage presupposes that both parties are single and that no common law marriage takes effect if one of the parties are married. So no bigomy.

:huh:
Excuse me bright one "Bigomy" is the marriage of two persons at the same time! What has being single or married in your own words have to do with the law as stated? Am I the only logical person to see what has transpired in this case?...geez...

 

[ReillyT]

:huh:
Excuse me bright one "Bigomy" is the marriage of two persons at the same time! What has being single or married in your own words have to do with the law as stated? Am I the only logical person to see what has transpired in this case?...geez...

Yes, I know what bigomy is. However, different states have different standards for when persons can be considered married by the common law. I bet that in no state can an already married person be considered common law married to another, hence no possibility of common law marriage (and hence bigomy) for an already married person.

However, in Florida, it doesn't matter because Florida doesn't recognize common law marriages at all.

Title XLIII of the Florida Code, section 741.211 reads:
Common-law marriages void.--No common-law marriage entered into after January 1, 1968, shall be valid, except that nothing contained in this section shall affect any marriage which, though otherwise defective, was entered into by the party asserting such marriage in good faith and in substantial compliance with this chapter.

Good enough for you, Bright one?

 

[archangel]

Yes, I know what bigomy is. However, different states have different standards for when persons can be considered married by the common law. I bet that in no state can an already married person be considered common law married to another, hence no possibility of common law marriage (and hence bigomy) for an already married person.

However, in Florida, it doesn't matter because Florida doesn't recognize common law marriages at all.

Title XLIII of the Florida Code, section 741.211 reads:
Common-law marriages void.--No common-law marriage entered into after January 1, 1968, shall be valid, except that nothing contained in this section shall affect any marriage which, though otherwise defective, was entered into by the party asserting such marriage in good faith and in substantial compliance with this chapter.

Good enough for you, Bright one?

:moon4:
Now that was a typical attorney's comment and stated court and law decisions,however did you ever hear of case law...humm...that was the point I was getting too!...Law is never definite..case law is what the State must go for...This would be a great case to persue ie:Bigomy laws are way too general in definition...this guy is hiding behind outdated and antique generalizations of the intended purpose of the law... :fu2:

 

[ReillyT]

:moon4:
Now that was a typical attorney's comment and stated court and law decisions,however did you ever hear of case law...humm...that was the point I was getting too!...Law is never definite..case law is what the State must go for...This would be a great case to persue ie:Bigomy laws are way too general in definition...this guy is hiding behind outdated and antique generalizations of the intended purpose of the law... :fu2:

Excuse me for citing a state statute that clearly answers your concerns.
Try to follow me here. This is very simple.
1. Michael and Terri Schiavo are married.
2. Michael lives with another woman.
3. Florida does not recognize common law marriage. This is clearly stated in a statute, which is the law of the state of Florida. So point 2 is irrelevant.
4. Since Michael Schiavo and the woman he lives with cannot be deemed married under the common law, he is not a bigamist.

While I appreciate your uneducated notions and blatherings about the nature of case law and bigamy, it really is that simple.

 

[archangel]

Excuse me for citing a state statute that clearly answers your concerns.
Try to follow me here. This is very simple.
1. Michael and Terri Schiavo are married.
2. Michael lives with another woman.
3. Florida does not recognize common law marriage. This is clearly stated in a statute, which is the law of the state of Florida. So point 2 is irrelevant.
4. Since Michael Schiavo and the woman he lives with cannot be deemed married under the common law, he is not a bigamist.

While I appreciate your uneducated notions and blatherings about the nature of case law and bigamy, it really is that simple.

:clap1:
Thank you sir for making life issues and law so simple..I am not or ever have wanted to be a attorney..I was just a former law enforcement officer.."Just the facts maam..just the facts" is what I operated on..not interpretation of vague laws...sometimes being so simple makes one wake up to the facts...maybe you will wake up one day too!What the heck just kill the poor girl so Michael can feel he is vindicated of what I feel "Gut Feeling" he probably had something to do with"Murder"just a dumb ex-cops hunch..please forgive me for my thoughts in this matter...have a great day!

 

[ReillyT]

:clap1:
Thank you sir for making life issues and law so simple..I am not or ever have wanted to be a attorney..I was just a former law enforcement officer.."Just the facts maam..just the facts" is what I operated on..not interpretation of vague laws...sometimes being so simple makes one wake up to the facts...maybe you will wake up one day too!What the heck just kill the poor girl so Michael can feel he is vindicated of what I feel "Gut Feeling" he probably had something to do with"Murder"just a dumb ex-cops hunch..please forgive me for my thoughts in this matter...have a great day!

Life isn't simple, but sometimes the law is. For the record, your little diatribe wasn't wrong because you feel Terri should live, it was wrong because you don't know anything about the laws of bigamy or common law marriage. Purely a technical legal matter, not an emotional point. Otherwise, feel free to go with your gut and be merry.

 

[dilloduck]

Life isn't simple, but sometimes the law is. For the record, your little diatribe wasn't wrong because you feel Terri should live, it was wrong because you don't know anything about the laws of bigamy or common law marriage. Purely a technical legal matter, not an emotional point. Otherwise, feel free to go with your gut and be merry.

I think the law in this case is still being made. Who should have the power to kill a person legally ?

 

[ReillyT]

I think the law in this case is still being made. Who should have the power to kill a person legally ?

You are right that that may be many areas of the law concerning this case that are still in flux, but archangel was merely referring to the laws of bigamy and common law marriage in Florida. At least the law of common law marriage is pretty settled in Florida.

 

[dilloduck]

You are right that that may be many areas of the law concerning this case that are still in flux, but archangel was merely referring to the laws of bigamy and common law marriage in Florida. At least the law of common law marriage is pretty settled in Florida.

Some lawyer will challenge that too. Just give it some time. Lawyers need this debate and confusion to provide for their income.

 

[spillmind]

but these days, nothing surprises me. in fact, it doesn't even bother me anymore.

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=480

 

[dilloduck]

but these days, nothing surprises me. in fact, it doesn't even bother me anymore.

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=480

and pro-choice candidates posture because of their staunch value system??

funny spilly

FYI--they all do it--it's how they keep their jobs