Thomason v. Thomason
Louisiana Court of Appeal
776 So. 2d 553 (2000)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
In 1958, Roger Thomason (defendant) obtained a marriage license with Barbara Thomason (plaintiff), after which the two lived together as a married couple. Barbara filed for divorce in 1998. Roger countered, stating that he was not, and had never been, married to Barbara. At a hearing, Roger testified that no wedding ceremony ever took place and that his alleged marriage to Barbara was never formalized. Roger further testified that he reminded Barbara that they were not married shortly before the birth of their first child. By contrast, Barbara testified that she believed in good faith that a marriage had taken place because after obtaining the marriage license, she went with Roger to the home of the justice of the peace and received a wedding ring. Barbara disputed Roger’s claim that he told her the marriage was invalid before the birth of their first child. The trial court found that Barbara’s testimony was credible and that Roger’s was not. Accordingly, the trial court held that Barbara was entitled to the civil effects of marriage as a putative spouse because she believed in good faith that her 40-year marriage to Roger was valid and that she held that good-faith belief until Roger disputed the validity of the marriage in his answer to Barbara’s divorce petition. Roger appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Doucet, 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.
