Common Law Marriage by State (2027)

A common-law marriage is a real marriage that a couple forms without a license or ceremony, by agreeing to be married and then living as a married couple. Seven states and the District of Columbia let a couple form a new one today, two more allow it only in a narrow form, and the rest have either ended it or never allowed it.

This page is about common-law marriage in the United States. "Common law" on its own means judge-made law built from court decisions, and Canada's "common-law partner" status is a separate idea: for Canadian tax purposes, the Canada Revenue Agency treats a couple in a conjugal relationship as living common-law if at least one listed condition applies, such as having lived together for at least 12 continuous months or having a child together (Canada Revenue Agency). That rule does not apply in any U.S. state.

Information last verified on November 2, 2026.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers common-law marriage in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia: which jurisdictions let a couple form one, which ended it and on what date, how a marriage formed in one state is treated in another, and how federal agencies treat it. It does not cover Canadian provinces or other countries. For related topics, see our guides on divorce laws by state, marriage license requirements, alimony laws by state and child support laws.

What Is a Common Law Marriage?

A common-law marriage is formed by the couple's own agreement and conduct rather than by a license and a ceremony. The details differ by state, but the core is the same: a present agreement to be married (not a promise to marry later), followed by living together and presenting themselves to others as a married couple. Both people must also be legally able to marry, which means old enough and not already married to someone else.

The courts in the formation states put it in similar words. Colorado's Supreme Court said a common-law marriage "may be established by the mutual consent or agreement of the couple to enter the legal and social institution of marriage, followed by conduct manifesting that mutual agreement" (In re Marriage of Hogsett & Neale, 2021 CO 1). Iowa lists "(1) intent and agreement in praesenti to be married by both parties; (2) continuous cohabitation; and (3) public declaration that the parties are husband and wife" (In re Marriage of Winegard, 278 N.W.2d 505 (Iowa 1979)).

Once it exists, a common-law marriage is a marriage. The spouses have the same legal status as a couple married by ceremony, and the marriage has to be ended the same way. For federal tax purposes, for example, the IRS treats a common-law marriage validly formed in a state that allows it as a marriage (26 C.F.R. § 301.7701-18).

Whether a particular couple formed one is a question of fact that a court or agency decides on the evidence. In each of the formation states, the question is whether the couple agreed to be married, not simply whether they lived together.

Common Law Marriage States: Which Still Recognize a New One?

Seven states and the District of Columbia let a couple form a new common-law marriage: Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Texas. Two more states recognize it only in a narrow form: New Hampshire after a partner dies, and Utah through a court order. The map below shows the status in each state. Select a state to open its guide.

To check one relationship, enter the state where it began, the year, and the state where you live now.

Common-law marriage checker

State where you lived together as a coupleChoose a stateAlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming

Year the relationship began

State you live in now (optional)Skip this stepAlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming

Choose the state where you lived together to see what its law says.

Open the full checker, with every state →

The seven states and DC that allow it

Colorado recognizes common-law marriage through its courts, using the Hogsett test quoted above. For a marriage entered into on or after September 1, 2006, Colorado law adds that each party must be 18 or older and the marriage must not be one the state prohibits (C.R.S. § 14-2-109.5, Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 14). That 2006 date is an age rule, not a cut-off.

Iowa uses the three Winegard elements, and the Iowa Supreme Court declined an invitation to abolish the doctrine in that case. Claims are "carefully scrutinized," and the person asserting the marriage carries the burden of proof (In re Marriage of Martin, 681 N.W.2d 612 (Iowa 2004)).

Kansas requires "(1) capacity of the parties to marry; (2) a present marriage agreement between the parties; and (3) a holding out of each other as husband and wife to the public" (In re Estate of Antonopoulos, 268 Kan. 178 (1999)). Kansas will not recognize a common-law marriage contract if either party is under 18 (K.S.A. 23-2502).

Montana provides by statute that "Common-law marriages are not invalidated by this chapter" (MCA 40-1-403). The Montana Judicial Branch tells readers that "There is no specific length of time" and that a common-law marriage "requires a legal Dissolution of Marriage to terminate the relationship" (Montana Judicial Branch).

Oklahoma recognizes it through case law. The Oklahoma Supreme Court said "A common law marriage is formed when 'the minds of the parties meet in consent at the same time,'" and that the person claiming one must prove it by clear and convincing evidence (Standefer v. Standefer, 2001 OK 37). In a 2019 order, the court said a 1999 change to the marriage statute "did not abolish common law marriage" and that "For the Legislature to abolish common law marriage, it must be explicit" (Erlandson v. Coppedge, 2019 OK 66).

Rhode Island has "long" recognized common-law marriage, which "can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the parties seriously intended to enter into the husband-wife relationship" and that their conduct led the community to believe they were married (Sardonis v. Sardonis, 106 R.I. 469 (1970)). A 2025 bill to abolish it did not become law (see the 2027 section below).

Texas calls it an "informal marriage." It can be proved by a signed declaration of informal marriage, or by evidence that the couple "agreed to be married and after the agreement they lived together in this state as husband and wife and there represented to others that they were married" (Tex. Fam. Code § 2.401). A person under 18 may not be a party to an informal marriage, and neither may a person who is already married to someone else.

The District of Columbia recognizes a common-law marriage where cohabitation followed "an express mutual agreement to be husband and wife," and that agreement must be "in words of the present tense" (East v. East, 536 A.2d 1103 (D.C. 1988)).

The two narrow forms: New Hampshire and Utah

New Hampshire does not let living couples form a common-law marriage. Its one exception applies after a death: a couple who lived together, acknowledged each other as spouses and were generally reputed to be married for three years, until one of them died, are treated as having been legally married (RSA 457:39). Because the status arises only at a death, there is nothing for a living New Hampshire couple to divorce.

Utah recognizes a marriage that was not solemnized only if a court enters an order validating it. The court must find that the marriage arises out of a contract between two people who are of legal age and able to consent, legally able to marry, have cohabited, mutually assume marital rights, duties and obligations, and hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as spouses (Utah Code § 81-2-408). The petition window for that order closes on May 5, 2027.

States That Ended Common Law Marriage

Of the remaining states, some ended common-law marriage on a set date and still recognize one formed there before that date; the others never allowed it, or ended it so long ago that no exact cutoff date applies. The table at the bottom of this page gives each state's rule and its controlling statute or case.

The recent cut-offs matter most to living couples, because a marriage formed before them can still be proved today:

• South Carolina: the state Supreme Court ruled that "no individual may enter into a common-law marriage in South Carolina after the date of this opinion," which was filed July 24, 2019 (Stone v. Thompson, 428 S.C. 79 (2019)). The ruling applies "purely prospectively."
• Alabama: "No common-law marriage may be entered into in this state on or after January 1, 2017," and an otherwise valid one entered into before that date "shall continue to be valid" (Ala. Code § 30-1-20).
• Pennsylvania: "No common-law marriage contracted after January 1, 2005, shall be valid," and one contracted on or before that date is not invalidated (23 Pa.C.S. § 1103). January 1, 2005 itself falls on the valid side of the line.
• Georgia: no common-law marriage may be entered into on or after January 1, 1997, and earlier ones "shall continue to be recognized" (O.C.G.A. § 19-3-1.1, as quoted in Norman v. Ault, 287 Ga. 324 (2010)).
• Idaho: the 1996 change does not invalidate "any marriage contract in effect prior to January 1, 1996" (Idaho Code § 32-201).
• Ohio: common-law marriages are prohibited "On and after October 10, 1991," and one that occurred in Ohio before that date remains valid (Ohio Rev. Code § 3105.12).
• Florida: "No common-law marriage entered into after January 1, 1968, shall be valid," with an exception for a marriage entered into in good faith and in substantial compliance with Florida's marriage chapter (Fla. Stat. § 741.211).

A few states with old abolitions are easy to misdate. A 1917 law, which took effect on January 1, 1918, ended common-law marriage in Wisconsin (Laws of 1917, ch. 218). Missouri ended it with a 1921 law that declared "Common-law marriages hereafter contracted shall be null and void" (Hesington v. Estate of Hesington, 640 S.W.2d 824 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982)). In Alaska, the Supreme Court treated the 1917 territorial license law as the end of common-law marriage there (Edwards v. Franke, 364 P.2d 60 (Alaska 1961)); the January 1, 1964 date in the current Alaska code is a later licensing rule, not the abolition date. Whether a particular relationship that began before one of these old dates was a marriage is for a court to decide.

In some states, the courts say common-law marriage was not part of their law at all. Massachusetts' highest court said "We have never recognized common law marriage" (Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615 (1994)), and the Arkansas Supreme Court held in 1911 that the doctrine "has never obtained or become a part of the laws of this State" (Furth v. Furth, 97 Ark. 272 (1911)) and repeated in 2001 that "Arkansas does not recognize common-law marriages contracted in this state" (Fryar v. Roberts, 346 Ark. 432 (2001)). Hawaii is a special case: its Supreme Court briefly treated a marriage without a license as valid (Godfrey v. Rowland, 1905) but overruled that in 1920 (Parke v. Parke, 25 Haw. 397 (1920)); since then a license and ceremony have been required.

Is There a 7-Year Rule for Common Law Marriage?

No. No state that allows common-law marriage requires a set number of years together. NPR called the idea that a common-law marriage forms after a set time together a myth, and a family-law professor it interviewed said seven years is the number people most often cite but that she had never figured out where it came from (WNYC/NPR).

Two rules in the formation and limited states do involve a number of years, and neither is a waiting period for getting married:

• New Hampshire, three years. The three years in RSA 457:39 count only when the relationship lasted "until the decease of one of them." It is a rule about a surviving partner, not a way for a living couple to marry.
• Texas, two years. If a case to prove an informal marriage by agreement and living together is not started within two years after the couple separated and stopped living together, the law presumes there was no agreement to be married. That presumption can be overcome with evidence (Tex. Fam. Code § 2.401(b)).

What the formation states look for is the agreement and the conduct that shows it. Montana's courts say "There is no specific length of time." A couple who lived together for many years without agreeing to be married did not form a common-law marriage, and a couple who did agree may have formed one quickly, depending on their state's law and the evidence.

Does Another State Recognize Your Common Law Marriage?

Most states that do not allow common-law marriage will still recognize one that was validly formed in a state that does, but each state applies its own rules, and the person claiming the marriage has to prove it. Social Security describes the usual rule this way: "If the marriage is valid in the state where celebrated, other states usually recognize the marriage to be valid," but a marriage "may be void in the state of the worker's domicile if it violates the law or public policy of that state" (SSA POMS GN 00305.005).

Many states write the rule into a statute. California, for example, treats a marriage valid where it was contracted as valid in California (Cal. Fam. Code § 308), so a couple who formed a valid common-law marriage in Texas and later moved to California can point to that statute there. The court in the new state will still ask whether the formation state's requirements were met, including Texas's requirement that the couple lived together in Texas.

This recognition does not come from the U.S. Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause. The IRS has noted "the refusal of some states to give full faith and credit to common-law marriages established in other states" (Rev. Rul. 2013-17). The 2022 Respect for Marriage Act bars states from denying full faith and credit to another state's marriage records and proceedings, or rights arising from a marriage, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity or national origin of the two people (28 U.S.C. § 1738C); it does not otherwise require states to recognize common-law marriages.

What about a short trip to a common-law state?

A short trip to a common-law marriage state usually does not create a marriage. Courts in several states, including Minnesota, Missouri, Kentucky, Nebraska, Arkansas and Florida, have refused to find one from visits, and the recognizing states' own rules generally require the couple to live there. A few New York and Maryland decisions allowed short-stay claims to go forward, so the outcome depends on the facts and the states involved.

• Minnesota: "we hold that Minnesota residents may not enter into a valid common-law marriage by temporarily visiting a state which allows common-law marriages" (Laikola v. Engineered Concrete, 277 N.W.2d 653 (Minn. 1979)).
• Missouri: Missouri residents who exchanged vows on a business trip to Tulsa were not married in Missouri's eyes (Hesington, 1982).
• Kentucky: "it takes more than riding across the Ohio River to make one legal" (Vaughn v. Hufnagel, 473 S.W.2d 124 (Ky. 1971)).
• Florida: a Florida couple's "infrequent trips to Georgia to visit relatives did not cause their otherwise void marriage to ripen into a valid common-law marriage" (Smith v. Anderson, 821 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)).
• New York: the Court of Appeals said a board erred in assuming that a "mere 'visit'" to Georgia could not produce a valid Georgia marriage, and sent the case back; it did not find a marriage (Matter of Mott v. Duncan Petroleum Trans., 51 N.Y.2d 289 (1980)). A federal appeals court later predicted that New York would recognize a Pennsylvania common-law marriage built on motel stays during a 21-year relationship, while noting that "In different circumstances, such facts alone might not prove sufficient" (Renshaw v. Heckler, 787 F.2d 50 (2d Cir. 1986)).

How Federal Agencies Treat a Common Law Marriage

Federal programs do not use one rule. Each agency applies its own test, so the same couple can face different questions from different agencies.

• IRS (federal taxes). "A marriage of two individuals is recognized for federal tax purposes if the marriage is recognized by the state, possession, or territory of the United States in which the marriage is entered into, regardless of domicile" (26 C.F.R. § 301.7701-18). IRS Publication 501 says the same in plain terms: a couple counts as married if they are "living together in a common law marriage recognized in the state where you now live or in the state where the common law marriage began" (IRS Pub. 501).
• Social Security. SSA looks "to the laws of the State where the insured had a permanent home" when the spouse applies, or when the worker died (20 C.F.R. § 404.345). SSA usually asks for signed statements from both spouses (or the survivor) and from blood relatives, on forms SSA-754 and SSA-753, and accepts other convincing evidence when those are unavailable (20 C.F.R. § 404.726; POMS GN 00305.065). Social Security's "deemed valid marriage" rule requires a marriage ceremony, so it does not cover a couple who never had one (20 C.F.R. § 404.346).
• Veterans Affairs. VA decides by "the law of the place where the parties resided at the time of the marriage or the law of the place where the parties resided when the right to benefits accrued" (38 U.S.C. § 103(c)). To prove a common-law marriage to VA, a claimant generally submits a sworn statement of the facts plus statements from at least two people who knew the couple as married (38 C.F.R. § 3.205). For a surviving spouse's VA death benefits, a common-law marriage attempted in a state that requires a ceremony can be "deemed valid" if the survivor did not know it was invalid and the other conditions are met (38 C.F.R. § 3.52; VAOPGCPREC 58-91).
• USCIS (naturalization). "USCIS recognizes common law marriages for purposes of naturalization if the marriage was valid and recognized by the state in which the marriage was established," even if the application is filed in a state that does not recognize common-law marriage. The couple must have lived in that jurisdiction and met its requirements (USCIS Policy Manual, Vol. 12, Part G, Ch. 2).

Same-Sex Couples and Common Law Marriage

Same-sex couples can form a common-law marriage on the same terms as other couples in states that still allow it; Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) requires equal treatment. In Obergefell, the Supreme Court said "The Court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry" (Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015)). The opinion does not discuss common-law marriage.

Courts in Colorado and Pennsylvania have recognized same-sex common-law marriages formed before same-sex marriage was legal in those states. Colorado's Supreme Court held "that a court may recognize a common law same-sex marriage entered in Colorado before the state recognized same-sex couples' fundamental right to marry" (In re Marriage of LaFleur & Pyfer, 2021 CO 3). Pennsylvania's Superior Court reversed a trial court and directed an order declaring that a common-law marriage existed as of February 18, 1997 (In re Estate of Carter, 159 A.3d 970 (Pa. Super. 2017)). The couple still has to prove every element, and in the companion Colorado case, Hogsett, the court found no marriage.

How a Common Law Marriage Is Proved and How It Ends

Because there is no license or certificate (unless a Texas couple signed and recorded a declaration), a common-law marriage is usually proved in a court or agency proceeding, with the person claiming it carrying the burden. Some states set a higher bar than usual: Oklahoma and Rhode Island require clear and convincing evidence (Standefer; Sardonis), and Colorado's trial court in Hogsett asked whether the marriage was established "by a preponderance of the evidence."

The kinds of evidence courts and agencies look at track what the law asks. The Oklahoma Supreme Court listed "cohabitation, actions consistent with the relationship of spouses, recognition by the community of the marital relationship, and declarations by the parties" as evidence of the required agreement (Standefer). VA's rule asks for the agreement at the start of cohabitation, the period of cohabitation, places and dates of residence, and whether children were born (38 C.F.R. § 3.205(a)(6)). Colorado's Supreme Court said the factors from its earlier Lucero decision "can still be relevant" but "must be assessed in context" (Hogsett).

A common-law marriage ends the same way any marriage does: by death or by a court decree such as a divorce. Moving out or separating does not end it. The Texas Supreme Court put it this way: "a common-law divorce is unknown to Texas law," and once the status exists, "it, like any other marriage, may be terminated only by death or a court decree" (Estate of Claveria v. Claveria, 615 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. 1981)). In the formation states, the existence of the marriage is decided inside the divorce or probate case, and if the court finds no marriage, there is nothing to divorce.

That matters before anyone remarries. A person who is still married cannot validly marry someone else; Texas, for example, bars a person who is presently married to someone else from entering an informal marriage (Tex. Fam. Code § 2.401(d)). If you may have formed a common-law marriage, get a free case evaluation from a family lawyer on your legal status before you enter a new marriage (attorney advertising).

Couples who never married, by ceremony or by common law, are not spouses, but they may still have legal claims against each other. California's Supreme Court held that courts "should enforce express contracts between nonmarital partners except to the extent that the contract is explicitly founded on the consideration of meretricious sexual services" (Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal.3d 660 (1976)). Rules on unmarried partners' property differ by state.

What Changes in 2027

These are the dated items we found for 2026 and 2027, each checked at its official source as of November 2, 2026.

• Utah's petition window closes May 5, 2027. Under Utah Code § 81-2-408, a petition to validate an unsolemnized marriage must be filed before May 5, 2027, and only during the relationship or within one year after it ends. Starting May 5, 2027, no new petition can be filed. The current text took effect May 6, 2026, as amended in the 2026 General Session (Utah Code § 81-2-408). The statute speaks only to filing new petitions. The Legislature's 2027 General Session (January through March 2027) could change the date; when we checked on November 2, 2026, no 2027 bills had been listed.
• Montana's 2027 session. A bill draft titled "Revise common law marriage laws" (LC0108) has been requested for Montana's 2027 legislative session; no text has been released (Montana Legislature). The session convenes January 4, 2027.
• Rhode Island. House Bill 5258 (2025) would have barred new common-law marriages starting January 1, 2026. On March 4, 2025, the committee recommended that it be held for further study, and no further action followed, so common-law marriage remains the law in Rhode Island (Rhode Island Legislature bill status).
• Texas. House Bill 1193 (2025) added a confidentiality box to the declaration of informal marriage and limits what a county clerk may publish or release when a party checks it, for declarations made on or after September 1, 2025 (Tex. Fam. Code §§ 2.402(b)(5), 2.406). It did not change the elements, the age rule or the two-year presumption (Tex. Fam. Code ch. 2). The 90th Legislature convenes in January 2027.
• California. AB 1267 (Stats. 2026, ch. 850), approved September 30, 2026, bars marriage and domestic partnership for anyone under 18 (California Legislative Information). It does not create or change any common-law marriage rule; California still does not allow one to be formed there. As a non-urgency statute enacted in 2026, it takes effect January 1, 2027, and its text refers to marriages entered into under the repealed minor-marriage sections "before January 1, 2027."
• Colorado (already in effect). House Bill 26-1218 recreated a savings clause providing that the section "DOES NOT REPEAL OR INVALIDATE ANY OTHERWISE VALID COMMON LAW MARRIAGE" entered into before September 1, 2006, or on or after that date in compliance with § 14-2-109.5 (Session Laws of Colorado 2026, ch. 114).
• Federal: ATF proposed rule. ATF has proposed joint registration for spouses under the National Firearms Act and said it would propose accepting common-law marriages "that can be reliably verified, such as by a state document." Comments closed July 7, 2026, and no final rule had been published as of November 2, 2026 (Federal Register, 2026-09154).
• Federal: Social Security forms. SSA announced "minor language changes to the SSA-753 for clarity," the Statement Regarding Marriage used in common-law claims (Federal Register, 2025-16598). That is a form update, not a policy change.

A Federal Register search for documents published since January 1, 2025 using the terms "common-law marriage," "common law marriage," "informal marriage" and "deemed valid marriage" also found a General Services Administration rule, effective December 8, 2025, that reorganized the Federal Travel Regulation; its definition of marriage includes a common-law marriage in a state or other jurisdiction where such marriages are recognized, if proven under that jurisdiction's law (Federal Register, 2025-22289). It also found Social Security and Railroad Retirement Board notices about the forms those agencies use to collect information on a claimed common-law marriage. That search did not cover bills in Congress.

Common Law Marriage by State: Full Table

The table groups every state by its current rule. Each state name links to its guide, which has the full authority and any exceptions. "Ended on a set date" means a marriage validly formed in that state before the date can still be recognized; whether a particular couple formed one is a question of fact.

Allows a new common-law marriage

Limited form only

Ended on a set date

Not allowed (no exact cut-off date)

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about common-law marriage in the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, as verified on November 2, 2026. It is not legal advice. Marriage law varies by state and changes over time, and whether a particular couple formed a common-law marriage is a fact question for a court or agency. If you have questions about your situation, including whether a marriage exists, how to end one, or what rights you or your partner may have, consult a family law attorney licensed in your state.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a common law marriage?

A common-law marriage is a marriage formed without a license or ceremony. In the states that allow it, the couple must be legally able to marry, must presently agree to be married, and must then live together and present themselves to others as a married couple. Once it exists, it has the same legal effect as a ceremonial marriage.

Which states recognize common law marriage in 2026?

Seven states and the District of Columbia let a couple form a new common-law marriage: Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Texas. Two more states recognize it only in a narrow form: New Hampshire after a partner dies, and Utah through a court order. Most states that do not allow common-law marriage will still recognize one validly formed in a state that does.

Is there a 7 year rule for common law marriage?

No. No state that allows common-law marriage requires a set number of years together. New Hampshire's narrow rule, which applies only after one partner dies, requires three years, and Texas presumes there was no agreement to be married if a case is not filed within two years after a couple separates, though that presumption can be overcome with evidence. What matters is the agreement to be married and the conduct that shows it.

Can you be common law married in any state?

No. A couple can form a new common-law marriage only in a state or district that allows it, and Texas, for example, requires the couple to have lived together in Texas and told others there that they were married. A short trip to a common-law state usually does not create a marriage. Most other states will recognize a common-law marriage that was validly formed in a state that allows it.

Does my state recognize a common law marriage from another state?

Usually, yes, but each state applies its own rules. Most states that do not allow common-law marriage will still recognize one validly formed in a state that does, and the person claiming the marriage has to prove it under the formation state's law. Some states, including Minnesota and Missouri, do not recognize one their own residents claim from a temporary visit to a common-law state.

Does Utah still recognize common law marriage after May 5, 2027?

Under Utah Code section 81-2-408, a petition to validate an unsolemnized marriage must be filed before May 5, 2027, and only during the relationship or within one year after it ends. Starting May 5, 2027, no new petition can be filed. The statute speaks only to filing new petitions.

Did Rhode Island abolish common law marriage?

No. A 2025 bill, House Bill 5258, would have barred new common-law marriages starting January 1, 2026, but the committee recommended holding it for further study on March 4, 2025, and it did not become law. Rhode Island courts continue to recognize common-law marriage proved by clear and convincing evidence.

How do you divorce a common law marriage?

The same way as any marriage: through a court divorce case. There is no separate common-law divorce, and separating or moving apart does not end the marriage. The court usually decides first whether a marriage existed; if it finds none, there is nothing to divorce. New Hampshire's after-death status cannot be ended by divorce because it arises only when a partner dies.

Does the IRS recognize common law marriage?

Yes, if it was validly formed. Federal tax rules recognize a marriage that is recognized by the state in which it was entered into, regardless of where the couple lives now. A couple who formed a valid common-law marriage in a state that allows it can file as married even after moving to a state that does not allow new ones.

Does Social Security recognize common law marriage?

Social Security decides whether a common-law marriage exists under the law of the state where the worker had a permanent home when the spouse applies, or when the worker died. It usually asks for signed statements from the spouses and from blood relatives on forms SSA-754 and SSA-753. Its deemed valid marriage rule requires a ceremony, so it does not help a couple who never had one.

Does California recognize common law marriage?

California does not let a couple form a common-law marriage there; an act of March 26, 1895 ended marriage by declaration. California does treat a marriage that was valid where it was contracted as valid in California (Family Code section 308), so a common-law marriage validly formed in a state such as Texas or Colorado can be recognized.

Can a same-sex couple have a common law marriage?

Yes, in the states that allow it, on the same terms as other couples; Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) requires equal treatment. Courts in Colorado (LaFleur and Pyfer, 2021) and Pennsylvania (Estate of Carter, 2017) have recognized same-sex common-law marriages formed before same-sex marriage was legal there. The couple still has to prove every element.

What is the difference between a common law marriage and a domestic partnership?

A common-law marriage is a marriage, with the same legal effect and the same need for a court decree to end it. A registered domestic partnership or civil union is a separate status created by statute in some states. For federal tax purposes, a domestic partnership or civil union that is not called a marriage under state law is not treated as a marriage.