• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Fixing Prior Divorce so Current Marriage is Valid

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Missouri
I have a marriage filed and registered in St Louis, MO on June 2, 2010. Several years later it was discovered that my wife had a divorce that was filed and then child custody and court was handled seperately and involved DFS, and ultimately the judge never signed the paper to dissolve, although it should have defaulted to a dissolve. She thought the divorce was final. That was in Washington County, MO. Ultimately my religion/church disciplined me for having an "invalid marriage". They gave me some time to fix it but multiple things caused it to take a long time to rectify. So here I am still at about 16 months of being removed from a good standing and cut off from my religious connections and church. We did everything needed to be properly married, and my wife thought she was divorced. We had several years of filing taxes and had 2 children, and everything else a married couple does. Since then a new divorce was finalized and a new marriage certificate just to cover all the bases. However this did not fix the situation in my "church". I know based on research that in some circumstances and especially in a case like mine sometimes the legal papers can be fixed so that our original June 2, 2010 marriage would be valid. For a fact in other states they allow a "Nunc Pro Tunc", to fix issues exactly like this. Bottom line is I have lots of drama and trouble for our family and issues that have affected our kids and technically 2 children out of wedlock. Can you please research and see what can be done? Also I know that with money almost anything can be fixed in the legal system. So how much money would it take?
If my original wedding date could be validated, then it could ultimately fix multiple issues for my family.
You may think that "it should have defaulted to dissolve", but that does not mean that *legally* that is what should have happen; it is unclear, from what you posted, that the judge made a clerical error, which would be the basis of a "nunc pro tunc". It could be that your wife was the sole cause of the error - after all, she did not have a copy of a divorce decree before getting involved with you.

Anyway, a "nunc oro tunc" certainly would not make sense now that she has obtained a subsequent divorce decree.

Yours is not a legal question. You have remedied the legality of your marriage.

Yours is a religious question - how to get you marriage recognized by your church. For this, the only one that could answer this are the leaders in your denomination. Every denomination has their own way of doing things, which is why no one here can give you any useful advice. Clearly, your faith tradition is dear to your heart, so I hope you can find someone within your faith that can clarify what you can do to get back into good standing.
 


not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
What if that's impossible? :rolleyes: ;)
Then OP will just have to live with that.

It's a free country: you can choose to change your religion if you don't like it, or you can stay with it and work within its framework.

While you and I may not find solace in a religion such as OP's, he seems pretty attached to it. So either he figures out how to work things out within the rules of his faith community, or he'll have to learn how to live with the consequences.

I would not lead with the notion that he should switch faiths immediately - that is a spiritual choice that he may yet arrive at on his own, but he is currently devoted to his current faith community.

FWIW, such a "crisis" would not happen in my personal faith community, as my denomination is kind of a loosey goosey lot when it comes to dogma and doctrine. OP should not face so much criticism for wanting to be accepted within his faith community, if that is where he truly thinks his spiritual needs are met.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Then OP will just have to live with that.

It's a free country: you can choose to change your religion if you don't like it, or you can stay with it and work within its framework.

While you and I may not find solace in a religion such as OP's, he seems pretty attached to it. So either he figures out how to work things out within the rules of his faith community, or he'll have to learn how to live with the consequences.

I would not lead with the notion that he should switch faiths immediately - that is a spiritual choice that he may yet arrive at on his own, but he is currently devoted to his current faith community.

FWIW, such a "crisis" would not happen in my personal faith community, as my denomination is kind of a loosey goosey lot when it comes to dogma and doctrine. OP should not face so much criticism for wanting to be accepted within his faith community, if that is where he truly thinks his spiritual needs are met.
I do not think that anyone was suggesting that he switch his faith...just perhaps his church. They are not necessarily one in the same.
 

CLEMCO

Junior Member
I appreciate the comments. I wish less focus was on opinions of the religious matter. Boiled down, the situation has created a legal situation that if ever challenged, both of the children are not "legally" mine, correct?
Also there was legal matters carried on for multiple years based on the original marriage date of 2010. Her other marriage and divorce was over 5 years prior, with it starting as a separation due to abuse of her and a child. From what is seen on the case net entries. The divorce was at the point of final signing by the judge, no further litigation was needed. Over 18 months had went by since original filing and multiple court dates. This final date was for the judge to finalize the divorce. My wife was petitioner and was not present, and her ex was not present, but his lawyer was present. There was no ongoing reason the judge should have kept the case open. However he did and several months later the case was marked closed due to time going by and no new entries.
So based on the obvious long term separation of the two and legal filings that led up to that date, it's hard to understand why the judge did not default to a standard dissolve, especially since there were no disputes over finances or custody. Now the assumed divorce and progress of our current family has had setbacks. It would seem to me that based on this and other things, there should be a way to correct a "legal techincality", especially in a situation that is clear no one was attempting to manipulate law and gain benefit by remaining married to the prior party.
It's situations like this that at times change current laws ultimately to allow for such mistakes to be remedied. To most, the new divorce and new marriage certificate would be only what matters, and one could move on and no one would care. However ultimately our tax filings and other legal matters could technically be called into question and "legally", my wife could be labeled a bigamist. All matters that should be allowed a chance to rectify and receive positive justice to correct someone's mistake with handling matters?
If you look up the use of "Nuc pro tunc" it has been used for exactly this situation in other states? Basically going back and fixing that original divorce so that all new matters are fully fixed and complications resolved?
 

xylene

Senior Member
The court's inaction didn't change your children's DNA or their birth certificates.
You're their father, that's forever.

If your church doctrine labels them b words, that's something for you to work out in your heart.

BTW, this was your spouse's divorce, so you are kinda coming off actually more than a little controlling. Maybe you need to have a heart 2 heart with your wife about forgiving her and letting it go.

Because you can't erase this by looking up some latin.

You should consult an experienced family law lawyer, this isn't realistically a pro se filing. Honestly you want someone who understands your faith, it's rules, and want you are doing this for to make sure this actually gets you where you want to be. Your church might even help you with that, if they aren't too busy shunning you.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I appreciate the comments. I wish less focus was on opinions of the religious matter. Boiled down, the situation has created a legal situation that if ever challenged, both of the children are not "legally" mine, correct?
No, that is wrong.
Also there was legal matters carried on for multiple years based on the original marriage date of 2010. Her other marriage and divorce was over 5 years prior, with it starting as a separation due to abuse of her and a child. From what is seen on the case net entries. The divorce was at the point of final signing by the judge, no further litigation was needed. Over 18 months had went by since original filing and multiple court dates. This final date was for the judge to finalize the divorce. My wife was petitioner and was not present, and her ex was not present, but his lawyer was present. There was no ongoing reason the judge should have kept the case open. However he did and several months later the case was marked closed due to time going by and no new entries.
So based on the obvious long term separation of the two and legal filings that led up to that date, it's hard to understand why the judge did not default to a standard dissolve, especially since there were no disputes over finances or custody.
Because that's not the judge's role in the system. One of the parties needed to have followed through to completion, and they did not. Think about it...what if the failure to follow through was due to a reconciliation that neither party bothered telling the court about? Should the judge just unilaterally terminate an intact marriage?

Now the assumed divorce and progress of our current family has had setbacks. It would seem to me that based on this and other things, there should be a way to correct a "legal techincality", especially in a situation that is clear no one was attempting to manipulate law and gain benefit by remaining married to the prior party.
This is not a "legal technicality" - this is a matter of a divorce not being finalized due to the inaction of the two parties involved.
It's situations like this that at times change current laws ultimately to allow for such mistakes to be remedied.
Since there was no clerical mistake, there is no reason for the law to change.

To most, the new divorce and new marriage certificate would be only what matters, and one could move on and no one would care. However ultimately our tax filings and other legal matters could technically be called into question
That won't happen - I'll let one of the tax pros explain why.

and "legally", my wife could be labeled a bigamist.
She was a bigamist.

All matters that should be allowed a chance to rectify and receive positive justice to correct someone's mistake with handling matters?
And, again, it was your wife (and her now-ex) who made the mistake by not following through.
If you look up the use of "Nuc pro tunc" it has been used for exactly this situation in other states? Basically going back and fixing that original divorce so that all new matters are fully fixed and complications resolved?
No, this is not at all what nuc pro tunc is designed to fix. Nuc pro tunc is designed to fix when the court made a clerical mistake, not when the parties failed to follow through. There is no mistake made by the court that needs to be fixed.
 

not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
Actually, OP sort of has a point... Since the children were born while his wife was technically still married to her previous husband, it's possible that there's some issues there. However, it is fairly standard in a divorce that has been done properly to disestablish paternity in such cases, since no one wants to pay child support for kids that aren't theirs.

OP, it is very simple to *legally* establish your paternity, but it has *nothing* to do with your marriage.

Your question seems to be how you can get your church to recognize their paternity, and remove the label of b******. We cannot answer that, as it is not a legal question, but a religion-specific question. If your denomination as a whole follows a strict hierarchy and rules, then that is what you have to work with. It your denomination goes more by a congregational polity, then you have to determine whether you can work it out with your specific house of worship, as they have the ability to exercise discretion.

P.S. OP, *legally* your wife *did* commit bigamy. You can't undo that.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
I appreciate the comments. I wish less focus was on opinions of the religious matter. Boiled down, the situation has created a legal situation that if ever challenged, both of the children are not "legally" mine, correct?
No, that is absolutely wrong. Your name is on their birth certificates, you are dad.

Also there was legal matters carried on for multiple years based on the original marriage date of 2010. Her other marriage and divorce was over 5 years prior, with it starting as a separation due to abuse of her and a child. From what is seen on the case net entries. The divorce was at the point of final signing by the judge, no further litigation was needed. Over 18 months had went by since original filing and multiple court dates. This final date was for the judge to finalize the divorce. My wife was petitioner and was not present, and her ex was not present, but his lawyer was present. There was no ongoing reason the judge should have kept the case open. However he did and several months later the case was marked closed due to time going by and no new entries.
That is what happens when cases go inactive. Had your wife been present for that hearing it wouldn't have gone that way.

So based on the obvious long term separation of the two and legal filings that led up to that date, it's hard to understand why the judge did not default to a standard dissolve, especially since there were no disputes over finances or custody. Now the assumed divorce and progress of our current family has had setbacks. It would seem to me that based on this and other things, there should be a way to correct a "legal techincality", especially in a situation that is clear no one was attempting to manipulate law and gain benefit by remaining married to the prior party.
That just isn't the way it works.

It's situations like this that at times change current laws ultimately to allow for such mistakes to be remedied. To most, the new divorce and new marriage certificate would be only what matters, and one could move on and no one would care. However ultimately our tax filings and other legal matters could technically be called into question and "legally", my wife could be labeled a bigamist. All matters that should be allowed a chance to rectify and receive positive justice to correct someone's mistake with handling matters?
The law isn't going to label your wife a bigamist and the IRS is not going to call your tax return into question. Basically, nobody is going to care, legally, that this happened except perhaps you and your church...because the problem has been fixed. You are legally married now.

If you look up the use of "Nuc pro tunc" it has been used for exactly this situation in other states? Basically going back and fixing that original divorce so that all new matters are fully fixed and complications resolved?
This was not a paperwork error. This was a case being administratively dismissed for lack of action. You cannot bring a motion to correct an error when no error was made.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top