Annulment vs. wait 6 months for a no fault divorce in NYC?

[ADG1980]

I was married 6 weeks ago in NYC + the union dissolved quickly.

We don't + never have lived together, I've only seen him 4x and it wasn't consummated. I consulted an attorney about a possible annulment + and was told that while all signs point to a 'sham marriage,' it's still complicated to build a case with evidence and could end up being very expensive if he doesn't respond to court summons and/or contests, which is likely.

If I am willing to wait 6 months, would it be cheaper + easier to end our marriage with a no-fault divorce, despite never living together and at that time, would I still need a separation agreement before I can file?

Thank you!

 

[Zigner]

Without further information, nobody here could tell you if you qualify for an annulment. Review the following site. If you need more information, speak to an attorney.

https://www.nycbar.org/get-legal-help/article/family-law/ending-your-marriage/annulment/

EDIT: Let me expand on my response. There is no way any of use could predict what would be cheaper and/or easier in your case. Generally, the consensus here is that a divorce is quicker, cheaper, and easier, but if you actually do qualify for an annulment, that may be the way to go. I don't see that the cost of a contested annulment would be any more than that of a contested divorce, except there is the very real possibility that the court will refuse to annul your marriage, thus requiring you to pay the cost to get a divorce anyway.

 

[Ohiogal]

I was married 6 weeks ago in NYC + the union dissolved quickly.

We don't + never have lived together, I've only seen him 4x and it wasn't consummated. I consulted an attorney about a possible annulment + and was told that while all signs point to a 'sham marriage,' it's still complicated to build a case with evidence and could end up being very expensive if he doesn't respond to court summons and/or contests, which is likely.

If I am willing to wait 6 months, would it be cheaper + easier to end our marriage with a no-fault divorce, despite never living together and at that time, would I still need a separation agreement before I can file?

Thank you!

Yes. And the separation agreement can be as easy as everyone keeps everything they already owned.

 

[zddoodah]

If I am willing to wait 6 months, would it be cheaper + easier to end our marriage with a no-fault divorce, despite never living together and at that time, would I still need a separation agreement before I can file?

I'm not sure why you think not living together is relevant to anything.

Under New York law, the grounds for annulment are as follows:

1. Incest
2. Bigamy
3. One or both parties are minors
4. One or both parties lack the necessary mental capacity to consent to marriage
5. One or both parties is "incapable of entering into the married state from physical cause" (i.e., is physically incapable of sexual intercourse and this is not known by the other party at the time of the marriage)
6. Consent to the marriage resulted from force, duress or fraud
7. Incurable mental illness

Which of those things, if any, is applicable to your situation?

Assuming, as appears to be the case, your answer to that question is "none," then a divorce is your only option. "No fault" divorce is codified in sub-sections (5)-(7) of section 170 of the New York Domestic Relations Law. Sub-section (7) requires no prior decree/judgment of separation or separation agreement.

 

[LdiJ]

I'm not sure why you think not living together is relevant to anything.

Under New York law, the grounds for annulment are as follows:

1. Incest
2. Bigamy
3. One or both parties are minors
4. One or both parties lack the necessary mental capacity to consent to marriage
5. One or both parties is "incapable of entering into the married state from physical cause" (i.e., is physically incapable of sexual intercourse and this is not known by the other party at the time of the marriage)
6. Consent to the marriage resulted from force, duress or fraud
7. Incurable mental illness

Which of those things, if any, is applicable to your situation?

Assuming, as appears to be the case, your answer to that question is "none," then a divorce is your only option. "No fault" divorce is codified in sub-sections (5)-(7) of section 170 of the New York Domestic Relations Law. Sub-section (7) requires no prior decree/judgment of separation or separation agreement.

I think that the "sham marriage" bit indicates that the OP believes that Number 6 applies.

 

[ADG1980]

Without further information, nobody here could tell you if you qualify for an annulment. Review the following site. If you need more information, speak to an attorney.

https://www.nycbar.org/get-legal-help/article/family-law/ending-your-marriage/annulment/

EDIT: Let me expand on my response. There is no way any of use could predict what would be cheaper and/or easier in your case. Generally, the consensus here is that a divorce is quicker, cheaper, and easier, but if you actually do qualify for an annulment, that may be the way to go. I don't see that the cost of a contested annulment would be any more than that of a contested divorce, except there is the very real possibility that the court will refuse to annul your marriage, thus requiring you to pay the cost to get a divorce anyway.

I married my boyfriend, who's European, because his visa spons

I think that the "sham marriage" bit indicates that the OP believes that Number 6 applies.

Immigration was one of the factors considered when we wed, which I know by law, is ok. But immediately after, the relationship changed. That would be the basis for an annulment. When I saw he was dragging his feet, I didn't sign the sponsorship docs.

 

[Zigner]

I married my boyfriend, who's European, because his visa spons

Immigration was one of the factors considered when we wed, which I know by law, is ok. But immediately after, the relationship changed. That would be the basis for an annulment. When I saw he was dragging his feet, I didn't sign the sponsorship docs.

Then you're probably going to need to get divorced. Talk to a local divorce attorney.

 

[zddoodah]

I think that the "sham marriage" bit indicates that the OP believes that Number 6 applies.

That might be, but nothing in the original post supported an allegation that the OP's consent to the marriage was procured by fraud, coercion or duress. Of course, what the OP posted more recently does support such an allegation.

I married my boyfriend, who's European, because his visa spons....

Immigration was one of the factors considered when we wed, which I know by law, is ok. But immediately after, the relationship changed. That would be the basis for an annulment. When I saw he was dragging his feet, I didn't sign the sponsorship docs.

So...are you alleging that your husband never wanted to marry you and only procured your consent to the marriage in order to obtain immigration documents? That may, indeed, give you grounds to seek an annulment, but let's go back to your original question:

would it be cheaper + easier to end our marriage with a no-fault divorce

Yes, it would. A "no fault" divorce requires no proof of anything beyond you testifying that your marriage "has broken down irretrievably for a period of at least six months." An annulment will require that you prove the part I put in bold. That may be particularly difficult to prove if, as it appears, your husband isn't in the U.S. It may also require that you report what happened to immigration authorities, which could create hassle.

You need to make a value judgment about whether the "benefit" you'll gain from doing an annulment instead of divorce is of any value to you and whether that value justifies the extra time, effort and cost that an annulment will require.

 

[Zigner]

It should also be kept in mind, as I stated above, that if the OP seeks an annulment and is unsuccessful, then she will have that cost on top of the cost of the divorce, whereas going straight to a divorce would eliminate those possible extra costs.

 

[LdiJ]

It should also be kept in mind, as I stated above, that if the OP seeks an annulment and is unsuccessful, then she will have that cost on top of the cost of the divorce, whereas going straight to a divorce would eliminate those possible extra costs.

That is a valid consideration, particularly if someone is lower income. I sure would be tempted however to go for an annulment myself in similar circumstances.

 

[ADG1980]

I married my boyfriend, who's European, because his visa spons

Immigration was one of the factors considered when we wed, which I know by law, is ok. But immediately after, the relationship changed. That would be the basis for an annulment. When I saw he was dragging his feet, I didn't sign the sponsorship docs.

There has also been no effort on his part of co

That might be, but nothing in the original post supported an allegation that the OP's consent to the marriage was procured by fraud, coercion or duress. Of course, what the OP posted more recently does support such an allegation.



So...are you alleging that your husband never wanted to marry you and only procured your consent to the marriage in order to obtain immigration documents? That may, indeed, give you grounds to seek an annulment, but let's go back to your original question:



Yes, it would. A "no fault" divorce requires no proof of anything beyond you testifying that your marriage "has broken down irretrievably for a period of at least six months." An annulment will require that you prove the part I put in bold. That may be particularly difficult to prove if, as it appears, your husband isn't in the U.S. It may also require that you report what happened to immigration authorities, which could create hassle.

You need to make a value judgment about whether the "benefit" you'll gain from doing an annulment instead of divorce is of any value to you and whether that value justifies the extra time, effort and cost that an annulment will require.

He is still in the US, but I have no signed the petition because after the marriage he reneged on living together, it was not consummate and I've only seen him 4x in 6 weeks. So there may be grounds, but my question is: Is there an advantage to an annulment beyond it being faster and the stigma of divorce? And if I can wait it out for a no fault divorce in 6 months, which would be April, since we've been married 6 weeks), am I leaving myself vulnerable for him to attacking my finances, etc. My property is in my name, as are credit cards, etc., there are no joint assets. My only concern is protection... and of course if I don't sign this petition, he could be back in Europe by April.

 

[LdiJ]

There has also been no effort on his part of co

He is still in the US, but I have no signed the petition because after the marriage he reneged on living together, it was not consummate and I've only seen him 4x in 6 weeks. So there may be grounds, but my question is: Is there an advantage to an annulment beyond it being faster and the stigma of divorce? And if I can wait it out for a no fault divorce in 6 months, which would be April, since we've been married 6 weeks), am I leaving myself vulnerable for him to attacking my finances, etc. My property is in my name, as are credit cards, etc., there are no joint assets. My only concern is protection... and of course if I don't sign this petition, he could be back in Europe by April.

Considering the shortness of your marriage and the fact that you have not ever lived together at all, I don't think that you have much risk of him being able to make a claim on any of your assets should you decide to go the divorce route.

For most people a divorce is just easier in the long term. However, an annulment voids the marriage as if it never happened, so there is some advantage, even if it's mostly psychological, in going that route.

 

[Zigner]

Considering the shortness of your marriage and the fact that you have not ever lived together at all, I don't think that you have much risk of him being able to make a claim on any of your assets should you decide to go the divorce route.

For most people a divorce is just easier in the long term. However, an annulment voids the marriage as if it never happened, so there is some advantage, even if it's mostly psychological, in going that route.

Based on what the OP has told us, it is unlikely that an annulment is an option.

 

[LdiJ]

Based on what the OP has told us, it is unlikely that an annulment is an option.

I don't know, I think that the "fraud" option under your number 6 factor might be an option. The OP obviously expected a real marriage, the spouse obviously did not intend that to happen.

 

[Zigner]

I don't know, I think that the "fraud" option under your number 6 factor might be an option. The OP obviously expected a real marriage, the spouse obviously did not intend that to happen.

"Obviously"? I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.