Case ID: mass_152/html/0533-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Field, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John H. Googins vs. Elvira E. Googins.
    Suffolk.
    November 14,1890.
    November 28, 1890.
    Present: Field, C. J., Devens, W. Allen, Holmes, & Knowlton, JJ.
    
      Divorce—Remarriage of Guilty Party.
    
    A marriage solemnized in this Commonwealth between the guilty party to a divorce and another, during the life of the other party and within two years from the time of the entry of the final decree, is void by force of the exception in the Pub. Sts.- c. 146, § 22.
    Libel for a sentence of nullity of marriage. Hearing in the Superior Court, before Lathrop, J., who, at the request of the libellee, reported the following case for the determination of this court.
    On December 9, 1865, the libellee, then named Elvira E. Basford, and George W. Gibson, both residents of this Commonwealth, were lawfully married at St. Albans, in the State of Vermont, and thereafter lived together as husband and wife in this Commonwealth. On May 2, 1884, Gibson duly obtained in this Commonwealth a decree of divorce nisi for desertion, which decree was on November 13, 1884, duly made absolute. On May 31,1886, the libellant and libellee were, in form of law, married in this Commonwealth, and thereafter lived together as husband and wife at Boston until October 17, 1889. No children were born of the marriage. Both parties contracted the marriage in good faith, under the belief that the libellee had a right to marry. George W. Gibson is still living.
    
      On these facts, the judge ruled that the libellant was entitled to a decree declaring his marriage with the libellee to be null and void. If the ruling was wrong, the libel was to be dismissed; otherwise, a decree was to be entered in favor of the libellant.
    
      B. W. Warren, (B. Tapp an with him,) for the libellant.
    No counsel appeared for.the libellee.
   Field, C. J.

At the time when the marriage between these parties was solemnized within this Commonwealth, the libellee was prohibited by statute from marrying within the Commonwealth. Pub. Sts. c. 146, § 22.

The marriage was therefore void. White v. White, 105 Mass. 325. Thompson v. Thompson, 114 Mass. 566. Cook v. Cook, 144 Mass. 163. Decree for the libellant.