Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Mariah Ellison v. Nancy Miller
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
On April 2, 2013 the plaintiff appeared before this Court seeking an annulment of her marriage to the defendant. Service was made upon the defendant by certified registered mail, return receipt requested, at the defendant's residence in Hawley, Pennsylvania. The defendant had failed to appear in this action.
The testimony indicated, and the Court finds, the following facts.
1. The parties intermarried on December 30, 2009 at Stamford, Connecticut. At that time, and at all times thereafter, neither party was a resident or domiciliary of the State of Connecticut. The parties have no minor children issue of their marriage.
2. Subsequent to the marriage, the plaintiff became aware that the defendant had previously entered into a civil union in the state of Vermont on October 9, 2000 with one Alissa S. Rashkin.
3. Evidence was presented from the Department of Health of the state of Vermont that the civil union had never been dissolved as of February 13, 2013.
Therefore the plaintiff has requested that her marriage to the defendant be annulled and declared void because of the prior ceremony that took place in Vermont.
Although the Court had subject matter jurisdiction in this action because the marriage of the parties was performed in this state, because service was made on the defendant by certified registered mail, the Court lacked in personam jurisdiction over the defendant. See Mazzei v. Cantales, 142 Conn. 173 (1995).
However, the Court reserved jurisdiction to permit the plaintiff to effectuate service by other means.
As a result of the plaintiff's efforts, the defendant filed a pro se appearance in this matter in this court on April 15, 2013. The Court is satisfied that it now has subject matter and in personam jurisdiction.
The Court finds that the marriage between the parties was invalid and void because the defendant was and still is a party to a valid relationship (civil union) recognized in this state. Accordingly, a judgment of annulment may enter.
NOVACK, J.
JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE
Novack, Stanley, J.T.R.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: FSTFA134024789S
Decided: May 01, 2013
Court: Superior Court of Connecticut.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)