Marriage of Obaidi and Qayoum
Washington Court of Appeals
154 Wash. App. 609, 226 P.3d 787 (2010)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Husna Obaidi (plaintiff), a 26-year-old Canadian, and Khalid Qayoum (defendant), a 19-year-old American, were the children of Afghan immigrants who lived in Washington State. Qayoum could not speak, read, or write Farsi and was mostly unfamiliar with Afghan culture. On December 30, 2005, Qayoum learned that in 15 minutes he was to take part in the Nikkah, a Muslim religious ceremony celebrated in Afghanistan during which future spouses agree to a mahr, which is a prenuptial agreement founded on Islamic law that requires a husband to pay a dowry to his wife. Qayoum had never heard of a mahr before the ceremony. At the Nikkah, Qayoum chose his uncle to negotiate the terms of the mahr. Negotiations were conducted in Farsi. According to the mahr, Qayoum was to pay $20,000 to Obaidi in case of divorce. The entire ceremony was conducted in Farsi except when the celebrant asked Qayoum if he wanted to marry Obaidi. Qayoum signed the mahr, and his uncle explained the terms of the mahr afterwards. According to Afghan tradition, Obaidi and Qayoum were married upon signing the mahr. They held themselves out as husband and wife and had a Muslim wedding ceremony and later a civil ceremony. Obaidi and Qayoum lived together for about a year until Qayoum asked Obaidi to go to Afghanistan. She went, and when she came back three months later, Qayoum asked her to leave. Obaidi filed for divorce, seeking enforcement of the mahr. The trial court held that the mahr was enforceable, and Qayoum appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kulik, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.