More Litigative Insanity Due to Gays Not Being Able to Marry

Dec 2006
25,312
10,272
New Haven, CT
#1
Gay Couples Can Live Together Virginia Court Rules

Posted: February 28, 2007 - 7:00 pm ET



(Richmond, Virginia) The Virginia Court of Appeals has ruled that same-sex couples can live together, reversing a lower court ruling that said the word "cohabit" only applies to opposite-sex couples because of the state's ban on same-sex marriage.



The case involved a Fairfax county man who had divorced his wife and wanted his support payments ended because she had entered into a domestic relationship with another woman.



The marriage ended in 1994 with a settlement that required the man to pay his ex-wife $4,000 per month until either party died or the women entered a marriage or "cohabitation with any person in a situation analogous to marriage."



Following the dissolution of the marriage the woman began a relationship with another woman and entered into agreements with her on joint child-rearing and household duties.



The ex-husband went to court claiming the relationship amounted to "a situation analogous to marriage."



The former wife fought the attempt to end the payments and Fairfax County Circuit Judge M. Langhorne Keith agreed with her, ruling that because of the constitutional amendment disallowing gay marriage the term "cohabit" could apply only to a man and a woman.



The husband appealed to the Appeals Court. A three judge panel reversed Keith's ruling.



"Succinctly stated, that relationship, as established by the facts, is similar 'but not identical in form and substance' to a marriage," Judge James W. Haley Jr. wrote for the three judges who heard the case.



Haley noted, however, that the case hinged only on the language in the divorce agreement and nothing more.



Despite the caveat whether the ruling will be used to further partner rights in Virginia remains to be seen.



University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias told the Associated Press that the appeals court seemed to be treating same-sex couples the same as heterosexual couples - but only in the narrow analysis of contract law.



But David Spratt, former chairman of the Virginia Bar Association's Domestic Relations Section, told the AP that the ruling could have more far-reaching consequences.



"The legislature certainly does not recognize same-sex relationships as anything - they don't even recognize the capacity of same-sex couples to contract...So the fact that a court is saying a relationship between same-sex couples can be analogous to marriage is important."
 
Feb 2007
3,093
1,472
New York
#2
In short, you can be penalized for being in a same-sex relationship, but you can't have any of the benefits associated with it.



Yeah.... THAT'S fair...
 
Dec 2006
25,312
10,272
New Haven, CT
#3
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in Virginia.



I think the woman is kinda a low-life - wanting to collect alimony even though she's in a new contractualized relationship.



However, if the state is going to say that she's in a relationship that is analgous to marriage, how can they say they are honoring their state constitution which clearly states that no other arrangment resembling marriage will be recognized?



This may, indeed, give activists a serious peg to hang their hat upon.
 
Feb 2007
34,677
16
Los Angeles
#4
KnightOfSappho said:
In short, you can be penalized for being in a same-sex relationship, but you can't have any of the benefits associated with it.



Yeah.... THAT'S fair...




You got it wrong way around!



IT's to her benefit that she can shack up with another woman but still squeeze money from her longsuffering ex-husband!
 
Jan 2007
1,383
0
#5
KnightOfSappho said:
In short, you can be penalized for being in a same-sex relationship, but you can't have any of the benefits associated with it.



Yeah.... THAT'S fair...
Such is the paradox of common law marriage.