Supreme Court of Connecticut
569 A.2d 1112 (1990)
David Singh (plaintiff) and Seoranie Singh (defendant) were married in 1983. The following year, David and Seoranie filed a joint complaint, seeking annulment of the marriage based upon the belief that they were uncle and niece. The trial court entered a judgment of annulment, declaring the Singhs’ marriage null and void. Several years later, the parties learned that they were not directly related as uncle and niece; rather, Seoranie was the daughter of David’s half-sister. In 1988, the parties married in California, where marriage between half-blood relatives was not prohibited. Later that same year, David and Seoranie filed a joint petition in Connecticut state court, seeking to reopen the 1984 judgment of annulment. The trial court denied the joint motion and concluded that the legislature’s concern was not the actual blood relationship but the degree or distance of the relationship between the parties. David and Seoranie appealed. The Connecticut Supreme Court transferred the matter from the appellate court for consideration.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Healey, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.