Never divorced wife 2

[singlepapa43]

Nor did she say they didn't live together. That is why I said, if they continued to live together, the marriage was validated by law. Based on that, one can extend it to mean that if they didn't live together after the divorce to #2, it is not valid.

I agree. It all comes down to the timing of the divorces and her knowledge of his continued marriage to wife #2. If she divorced him prior to and knowing nothing about his still legal marriage to wife #2, she qualifies to have hers changed to an annulment. If she knew about it during their marriage and did nothing, she does not qualify for an annulment.

 

[I'mTheFather]

My goodness, your attack shows not only your ignorance but your arrogance. What legal training or experience do you have exactly? Are you just another ignorant loud mouth with no training who likes to spout off while hiding behind his keyboard?
Personally, I have taken multiple law courses and appeared in Federal and District Court Pro Se successfully as well as have a tested IQ of 165. How bout you buttercup?

Attack? Huh, pretty sensitive there.

This post of yours shows a lot more about you than what you posted.

 

[justalayman]

My goodness, your attack shows not only your ignorance but your arrogance. What legal training or experience do you have exactly? Are you just another ignorant loud mouth with no training who likes to spout off while hiding behind his keyboard?
Personally, I have taken multiple law courses and appeared in Federal and District Court Pro Se successfully as well as have a tested IQ of 165. How bout you buttercup?

.

It doesn't matter how smart you claim to be or what you claim to have done, where you are today is the greatest indicator of who you are. So, where are you now?

How much to do pay the window washer to do all that glass?

 

[singlepapa43]

.

It doesn't matter how smart you claim to be or what you claim to have done, where you are today is the greatest indicator of who you are. So, where are you now?

How much to do pay the window washer to do all that glass?

I agree and apologize for being retaliatory. I was enjoying a polite debate and attempting to offer free advice to the original poster. I did not appreciate being talked down to and rudely told to leave by someone who had not contributed to the conversation whatsoever. I appreciate your posts and opinions Layman, as well as your manners.

 

[I'mTheFather]

You consider this an attack??

The limited information was pretty clear. You ought to go back to your bankruptcy thread.

I suppose you consider these posts to be polite:

My goodness, your attack shows not only your ignorance but your arrogance. What legal training or experience do you have exactly? Are you just another ignorant loud mouth with no training who likes to spout off while hiding behind his keyboard?
Personally, I have taken multiple law courses and appeared in Federal and District Court Pro Se successfully as well as have a tested IQ of 165. How bout you buttercup?

And you ought to learn some manners. Especially when you have nothing worthwhile to contribute. Your attack was uncalled for.

For the record, I did not tell you to leave this thread. I suggested visiting your own thread while the bankruptcy expert was still online.

 

[I'mTheFather]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
I married a man five years ago who claimed on the marriage license he had been married twice before.

After the marriage; I found out he had actually been married five previous times AND never divorced number two. In 2015; he finally divorced #2 Without her knowledge. Is our marriage legal? And, if not; how do I have it declared void?

Also, for the record, this OP never said she was divorced. She never said they don't live together. She never, ever, implied that the marriage didn't continue. In fact, she asks, in the present tense, "Is our marriage legal?" Not, "Was our marriage legal?"

Finally, I found your posts regarding the OP's situation to be confusing and clouding the issue. That was my purpose in posting.

 

[singlepapa43]

You consider this an attack??



I suppose you consider these posts to be polite:





For the record, I did not tell you to leave this thread. I suggested visiting your own thread while the bankruptcy expert was still online.

My apologies. I thought you were telling me to leave the thread and being dismissive and it ruffled my feathers. I have already concluded my other thread and thanked them for their help. I will delete my offensive and retaliatory posts.

 

[Silverplum]

I agree and apologize for being retaliatory. I was enjoying a polite debate and attempting to offer free advice to the original poster. I did not appreciate being talked down to and rudely told to leave by someone who had not contributed to the conversation whatsoever. I appreciate your posts and opinions Layman, as well as your manners.

IF you intend to join the discussion and offer advice, do it correctly or not at all. Don't get snippy with the senior volunteer members: we have proven our value long ago.

That is all.

 

[singlepapa43]

IF you intend to join the discussion and offer advice, do it correctly or not at all. Don't get snippy with the senior volunteer members: we have proven our value long ago.

That is all.

I have as much right as anyone to join the discussion and express my opinion. If senior members are dismissive and rude, they should be called on their behavior accordingly. They do not run the site, nor are their opinions always correct, and are not exempt from common courtesy. Value, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
I apologized for the misunderstanding already, which I initially took as being asked to leave the thread and extremely rude.

 

[Silverplum]

I have as much right as anyone to join the discussion and express my opinion. If senior members are dismissive and rude, they should be called on their behavior accordingly. They do not run the site, nor are their opinions always correct, and are not exempt from common courtesy. Value, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
I apologized for the misunderstanding already, which I initially took as being asked to leave the thread and extremely rude.

I remain unimpressed.

 

[singlepapa43]

I remain unimpressed.

I assure you the feeling is mutual.

 

[stealth2]

Well, that is five minutes of life I will never get back. Sigh...

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Yes I did. And the author said the ex divorced wife #2 in 2015. She made no mention of them living together after he divorced wife #2, and apparently divorced him prior to his legal divorce from wife #2. He committed fraud and polygamy, in my opinion, from the information present.

That was my take. 2015 does not allow time for a common law marriage if she acts now. I did not feel it needed mentioned for that reason.

 

[singlepapa43]

That was my take. 2015 does not allow time for a common law marriage if she acts now. I did not feel it needed mentioned for that reason.

Thanks Road Warrior. I absolutely agree that more clear information is needed to give a substantive answer. Hopefully the poster will clear up the ambiguity of her original post so a more clear cut answer is obvious. Are they already divorced as I read into the OP, or just contemplating divorce and still living together? And was she aware that her "husband" was still married to another during their own "marriage"? The answers to those questions make all the difference.

 

[latigo]

Did you read zigner's post? If they lived together as husband and wife after the divorce their marriage is now valid. Basicslly it becomes a common law marriage which still needs a divorce to end.

I must respectfully disagree. The marriage is not then converted to a common law marriage. It remains as is simply because it is not declared void.

How could it be so in the forty-one states that do not recognize a consensual marriage? Many, if not all, of which (similar to Texas) provide that certain statutory grounds for annulling/voiding a marriage are abnegated because of condonation.