Trinitaria Rivera et al. v. Santos Garcia (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This is an action for a declaratory judgment in which the plaintiffs, Trinitaria Rivera and Jose Rivera, seek a declaration that the divorce between Trinitaria Rivera and her previous husband, the defendant Santos Garcia, on December 16, 2004, in the Dominican Republic, was valid, and that the marriage of the plaintiffs on November 12, 2005 in Connecticut is a valid and legal marriage.   Garcia was served at his abode and was defaulted for failure to appear.   Based upon the affidavit submitted, the court finds that he is not in the military service.

The matter came before the court on November 28, 2011, at which time the court heard testimony from the plaintiffs and received exhibits.   Based upon the evidence presented, the court finds the following facts.   Trinitaria Rivera was born in the Dominican Republic.   She married Santos Garcia in New Jersey in 2001.   Without her knowledge, he filed for a divorce in the Dominican Republic while she was living in Connecticut.   She investigated the matter and found that on June 13, 2005 (not December 16, 2004 as alleged in the complaint), the court in the Dominican Republic had entered a divorce regarding her marriage to Santos Garcia.   She then married Jose Rivera on November 12, 2005 in Connecticut.   For the past six years since that time Trinitaria Rivera and Jose Rivera have lived together and held themselves out as a married couple.

“The concept of ‘practical’ recognition of a divorce decree rendered in a foreign nation where neither spouse is domiciled has been recognized by a number of courts ․ [P]ractical recognition may be accorded such decrees by estoppel, laches, unclean hands, or similar equitable doctrine under which the party attacking the decree may be effectively barred from securing a judgment of invalidity ․ Thus, a party may be precluded from attacking a foreign divorce decree if such an attack would be inequitable under the circumstances ․ Moreover, in a case involving a Mexican divorce, our Supreme Court has recently recognized that out-of-state divorces are [now] both less likely and less opprobrious, and that, therefore, such divorces should not lightly be overturned where the parties had intended to channel the dissolution of their marriage in a legitimate rather than in an illegitimate fashion ․ The rule precluding a person from attacking the validity of a foreign divorce if, under the circumstances, it would be inequitable to do so is not limited to situations of what might be termed true estoppel where one party induces another to rely to his damage upon certain representations as to the facts of the case ․ [I]f the person attacking the divorce is, in doing so, taking a position inconsistent with his past conduct, or if the parties to the action have relied upon the divorce, and if, in addition, holding the divorce invalid will unset relationships or expectations formed in reliance upon the divorce, then estoppel will preclude calling the divorce in question ․ Thus, if one party has accepted benefits under the original decree or waited an unreasonably long time before attacking it, an invalid decree will be held immune from attack, particularly if the other party has remarried in the meantime ․ Consequently, even if a divorce decree rendered in a foreign country is jurisdictionally invalid under the general rule set forth in Litvaitis, the judgment may be permitted practical recognition.”  (Citations and internal quotation marks omitted.)  Bruneau v. Bruneau, 3 Conn.App. 453, 456–58 (1985).

Although Trinitaria Rivera did not know of or appear before the court in the divorce proceedings in the Dominican Republic, upon hearing from relatives that a divorce took place, she verified that to be true and subsequently did not contest or attempt to reopen that divorce but instead relied upon it in marrying Jose Rivera.   Thus, pursuant to the holding in Bruneau, the divorce decree should be given practical recognition by this court since to do otherwise would “unset relationships or expectations formed in reliance upon the divorce.”  Id.

Therefore the court enters a declaratory judgment that the divorce between Trinitaria Rivera and Santos Garcia was valid and recognized under Connecticut law and the marriage between Trinitaria Rivera and Jose Rivera is a valid legal marriage.

Jane S. Scholl, J.

Scholl, Jane S., J.