a by regulation provides for a specific set of legal scampers for establishing a deemed a valid marriage when there is an impediment for a defect in a valid marriage under two provisions of  regulations at thirty three point two zero five a and c in this case the board reviewed the validity of the marriage only under a six and did not consider whether or not under two o five c which requires consideration of whether or not there was proof of a marriage and the requirements of three point five two were met in this case the veterans  award of its obligation to determine whether or not the remaining requirements for a d m valid marriage had been met under the provisions of three point two zero five a one and three point two zero five  through the provisions of a six are premised upon the jurisdiction involved in this case the state of maine excepting common law marriage the state of maine as acknowledged by the or in its decision at the page two of four of the appendix recognize that common law marriages were not recognized by the state of maine that rendered any attempt to establish the validity of a common law marriage a knowledge because she could not meet the requirements under a six because that jurisdiction did not except common law marriages the board found that mis mr castro story oh excuse me and miss la fun tune never entered into a valid civil or ceremonial marriage that is not the legal standard under two zero zero five there is in fact no one guage in the statute or in the regulation that makes reference to a civil or ceremonial marriage the question under a two of five a is whether or not there is marriage or a deemed valid common law marriage that's correct your honor and they did that without making an analysis under two o five c and that issue was specifically raise willow before the veterans court and the marriage certificate in its view was not credible under the circumstances and so that is why you concluded that there wasn't proof a civil ceremony or comment on that that's correct  fortunate of the text of the regulation well because we submit on the proper interpretation of three point two zero five a there is no requirement for a credibility assessment as to whether or not under the regulations under your view the regulations must accept that no you are because i think that's a different issue as to whether or not you can establish that this was a forged document there is no there was no challenge to whether or not this document did or did not or excuse me did not represent what this law far tune said was the marriage ceremony that she went through with mistrust or consume for the moment the board concluded criteria that the v a is not entitled to weigh whether it's true or not correct that was your i mean but all that is required is an offer of proof this particular section of the regulation marriage certificate if when it's face it looks credible the v a can't go behind that yes and one of the problems is even if all of that is true and that would really be quite a stretch but even if that were correct you don't actually comply your client did not comply with any of two zero five eight six s for patients instead now you want to wish him well together and do some sort of totality while we got half of this one and part of that when we got a letter from the clergyman but not an affidavit we have a marriage certificate but it doesn't take the place of a marriage like the regulation requires we have you have all of these  you have half of this in a quarter of that and you want to motion together so you don't actually comply do you with any of the three point two or five precise sections with respect your honor i believe the evidence does show that you know what is required under which a section do you think even filing a one which it says that the copy of the record the church record must articulate the date and place of marriage and you've admitted that it does not acknowledge the place of marriage on the certificate anywhere place of the marriage and you've admitted that your certificate does not comply with the not comply with the date or place or school me the place it does have the day it says that on the sixth of june so you don't mean three zero three point that is not an analysis that was made by the board or by the veterans for the entire analysis was made under a six based upon common law marriage now i agree with the court that that could be a problem on if they said that the absence of the place of the marriage was not complied with by the live testimony of the woman who performed the ceremony but there was live testimony of the woman who performed the ceremony who is also a signatory to that marriage certificate we believe that there was substantial compliance with the proof of marriage was that this marriage was not valid as a common law marriage because common law marriages are not recognized in the state of maine the then question becomes whether or not there is an obligation under two o five c to make a deemed marriage analysis the veteran court said that there was no obligation on the part of the board to make that deem valid marriage  correct and that is a valid marriage we contend that the provisions of two of five contemplate it invalid or an unsuccessful attempt at a valid marriage but it still requires if you're and requires the couple to hold themselves as married he did not it's on contradicted in the v a s files that he said he wasn't married he was divorced he never agreed that he was married during the treatment time  so he if they held as married and it just wasn't permissible under the state might have an argument but with respect your right that is in response to a common law marriage and whether or not the requirements for the common law marriage are met we stipulate that the common law marriage requirements are not met so you're going under a one yes it is the problem is for you under a why there's still no shows that the entire analysis is to be made from the perspective not of that trend but from the perspective of the claimant whether or not the claimant believed and there is evidence in this record that there was attempted marriage that occurred more than one year before the veteran da if there is evidence that if with that she entered into that we're back to your point that the plaintiffs proof is in contestable not the of proof is in contest well but oh as to the i believe that it is incontestable as to the offer of proof of marriage however then in order to qualify for a deemed valid marriage a evaluate the voracity credibility of the submitted marriage certificate to the extent of whether or not it does or does not represent a valid marriage when it went if it does not under the duty to it's assessed she was specifically requested to submit something and she didn't submit and then the board further said ok they were inconsistent statements by the person that performed the ceremony and then on top of all that we have a veteran who consistently for several years continue to assert to the v a that he was single the whole time he was never married during that relevant period so are you telling me that it was wrong for the board to reach all of those findings made all those observations and reaching a conclusion that the marriage certificate was not credible as it relates to the validity of a valid marriage based upon that certificate i agree with that that then triggers the requirement to look to whether or not the proof of marriage proffered thanks can be considered a deemed valid marriage if the requirements up so now you don't have any evidence that's credible to support the claim now what is the board supposed to do still give the fees and still give the money to know your client the board is required as requested in the briefing below to make an analysis under two zero five see what analysis is left to do to determine the next one lone proffer proof that marriage has now been discredited and pushed to the side what's left before you want to the regulations because all that is required on that regulation is whether or not that is proof of a marriage it is proof of a marriage it is not proof of a valid marriage but it is proof of a marriage to all five c then requires an analysis from the claimants point of view what if the board said that it's not proof when when the board said this is not credible all five c it's all calculated from the claimant point of view based upon what the claimant understood to have been a valid marriage i'm sorry when you told me that maybe henri me then they go through the document the indicate the document was not signed by two witnesses and if the location of the ceremony is not provided on the document to a foreign to a five didn't they make those express fact finding as the exact basis why they rejected the certificate of marriage which she identified as satisfying the civil ceremony on marriage requirement of two or five day just the better in school it's not except for two thousand and four marriage certificate and the last because the veterans court did not accept a two thousand and four marriage certificate as conclusive proof of a marriage that should be deemed about the better ins court would qualify her as a surviving spouse entitle to receive veterans benefits the determination of whether marriage exists dead is a question of fact that the veterans court reviewed for clear error having found no clear error in the board's findings that no marriage existed the veterans court affirmed the board's decision now just look fortune contends that she satisfied the correct legal standard under three point two five a wine that the  court was required to accept the two thousand and four marriage certificate as conclusive proof of marriage because it constitutes a church record under three point two zero five a one do you agree with mr carpenter's assertion that determination about whether or not there this really satisfies proof of marriage no that position is in cracked the board and the veteran's court is entitled to as an inherent fact finder look behind the evidence and see whether or not weighs the evidence such that it satisfies whether or not a marriage existed and it did so in this case it determined that the marriage certificate was not credible the timing of when the certificate w fact that the only witnesses named on the certificate was misled fortunes and purportedly the better and again the fact of the marriage could not be authenticated when the v a attempt to do so through the state of maine hundred six and two thousand and one as well as the treatment and exam notes from one thousand nine hundred nine and two thousand and four where the veteran reporter that he was not married and that he was divorced or living with friends and based on the review of the evidence that it had before it they considered that that information from the veteran was substantially more persuasive than the information that mr fortune had submitted in fact if you look at the pertinent statute and three point two five to see that we see that three point two five b is the provision related to a valid marriage and it stays in the absence of conflicting information proof that marriage may be accepted as establishing a valid marriage three point two five be a different circumstance than what's being evaluated three point two five c three point two five b as i understood it was trying to figure out whether there was a valid marriage perhaps because there was a prior earlier marriage where is three point two or five c it's not about trying to figure out a valid marriage but it's fine for your out whether something can be deemed valid marriage is very limited and so i guess what i'm trying to figure out is fire you reference in a separate category three point two or five to be valid marriages and the fact that you can can express to consider conflicting information in that circumstance when what we're really trying to figure out here is a three point two zero five c being valid marriage three different category and so therefore three point  review conflicting information you know in a valid marriage circumstance because the regulation expressly says it and then the regulation for three point two five c doesn't say and so i'm trying to figure out whether there's some kind inference there that maybe for three point two or five be valid marriage inquiries of course you have to consider conflicting evidence the regulation says three point two zero five c the neighboring subsection of this regulation says nothing about considering conflicting information so i'm trying to figure out whether relating to marriages pertinent to this claim you'll see there that the evidence that submitted must be satisfactory to the secretary in order to establish or proport of marriage to be deemed valid so when you take that statute in conjunction with a full reading of thirty eight c f r section three point two five we see that the v a is entitled to weigh evidence and to consider information behind the evidence that proffered by the claimant or the a valid emergency doesn't bother to mention that conflicting information out of the s s three point two five is very limited in scope and pertains only to when we are going to accept appellant's position that she had no knowledge of an impediment to the marriage three point two zero five c in and of itself does not establish whether or not a marriage should be deemed valid so again that whether it believes there was a marriage takes out that conflicting information weighing and just says if there is evidence under ebay and she meets the section three point five two and she says that she had no knowledge of the impediment so it's almost as though a valid marriage allows for way using of evidence and they deemed valid marriage has to accept one its face what  is proffered if it meets the criteria of your three point two five a when your honor says done we would challenge what that done means that done in the scope of three point two five c would mean that affidavit from the officiant which would satisfy three point two zero five a three neither of which were met here the board made five findings but suppose those had in fact been completely satisfied and that doesn't that mean that she's satisfied the requirements of c three point two zero five c she has satisfied the requirements of three point two five c to show that she did not have knowledge of the legal impediment and that we will accept her representation and not treat it says i that says werry surviving spouse has submitted proof of marriage in accordance with paragraph a which she would have successfully done if she had surrendered a marriage certificate that included the date and the place of her marriage she did not but if she had then she would have met this first clause she would be a surviving spouse who submitted proof marriage in accordance with ebay and also meets the requirements of three point five two she would meet those requirements as well there's no question she meets those requirements and had no knowledge she would have there were three criteria in c and she would have met all of them right but then if we read further it says in the absence of information to the contrary as proof of that fact that family would what do you think that language refers to that fact refers to whether she had knowledge of whether or not she had knowledge of the adamant ok or not whether or not she assessing whether she had knowledge of the impediment but it doesn't say we're going to allow conflicting information with regard to her proof of marriage but when taken in conjunction with the v a s inherent role as a fact finder and turning again to thirty eight u s c one o three where it states that the evidence must be satisfactory to the secretary in order to establish a purported marriage to be deemed valid you can't get though for some other analysis as to what other contradictory evidence might be in the record and certainly the boy secretary has the secretary articulated in this regulation what would be the criteria for what would satisfy the secretary pursuant to the statute isn't the regulation do exactly that the regulation and three point two five a sets forth examples of types of evidence that it will accept but as not just accept it says marriage is established by one of the following types of  is already contemplating a possible battle of the marriages where there's two different people claiming to be married to the veteran and so therefore you're going to a five you recognizing the possibility of instances where there is going to be conflicting information where there is a party protesting someone else's assertion of being married to a voter and that's why it's not all about conflicting information not simply why and we accept whatever submitted for the proof of the matter yes your honor and here they looked very carefully at the marriage certificate and enough it south and found it not to be credible because of the several factors that the veterans court set forth at appendix nine taken in conjunction with the better and own statements throughout the course of several years ninety three ninety six two thousand and one one thousand nine hundred ninety two thousand common law or otherwise or i have read the bottom of page two or four going on to five and if irs to me that this is addressing the question of only the validity of the ceremonial marriage not the offer of proof of the marriage certificate and that it does not speak to the marriage certificate as contemplated under a want it does refer to that black of location but it does not make specific reference to this analysis of the facts being under water it seems to me that the validity of the marriage is an issue in the in subsection b of two and five when there is a contest the question of the liberty of marriage under a is not in the issue the term valid is not use there merely that that is proof or proffer or offer of proof which if excepted under a is the end of the matter if it is not accepted under a then the question in this case is whether or not  fortune was entitle to the benefit of consideration and analysis of whether or not the marriage was deemed valid under two of five c a search for the questions in the family thanks for your attention