[WSBAPT] Domestic Partnership and Civil Marriage

[Lisa Schuchman]

I agree.  The marriage is a marriage under federal law.

Lisa E. Schuchman
206-325-2801
www.lisaschuchman.com<http://www.lisaschuchman.com/>

Happiness is not a goal; it is a by-product. -Eleanor Roosevelt

NOTE: I do not use encrypted email.  Messages sent to or from my office via email are not secure and may not be protected by attorney-client privilege. This email address is not monitored at all times.  If your matter is urgent, please phone my office during regular business hours.

Any tax advice included in this document and its attachments was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code.
P  Please consider the trees before printing this document

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of John Creahan
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2015 11:45 AM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Domestic Partnership and Civil Marriage

Hi Lincoln,
I believe that the couple’s first marriage is valid following Obergefell<http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf> (at 28):
The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States. It follows that the Court also must hold—and it now does hold—that there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.
I don’t think that their Washington actions would affect the validity of that marriage.
My $.02.
John

John Creahan
john at cairn-law.com<mailto:john at cairn-law.com>
1325 4th Ave., Suite 940
Seattle, WA 98101
206-621-5848
www.cairn-law.com<http://www.cairn-law.com/>
[cid:image001.png at 01CE636C.3EB992D0]

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Lincoln Miller
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2015 10:03 AM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBAPT] Domestic Partnership and Civil Marriage

Same-sex partners who are Washington residents marry in other state where same-sex marriage recognized (at time when Washington state does not recognize SSM).

Later, partners register as domestic partners in Washington (at time when Washington state does not recognize SSM).

Subsequently, Washington allows SSM and RDPs dissolve, with some exception, and convert into marriage on June 30, 2014 (the “DOMA Amendment”)

In this particular instance, an exception applies and the RDP does not automatically dissolve and convert into marriage because one of the partners is older than 62 years old.

The DOMA Amendment provides that for purposes of determining legal rights and responsibilities involving individuals who had previously had a state-RDP and had been issued a marriage license or are deemed married, the date of the original state-registered RDP will be considered the legal date of the marriage.

So, which of the following is the partners current legal status:


1.       Even though the RDP did not automatically dissolve and convert into marriage, the partners are nonetheless deemed to be married as of the date of the Washington RDP by virtue of their out-of-state marriage that pre-dated the RDP? or

2.       Because the RDP did not automatically dissolve and convert into marriage, the partners must solemnize their marriage (again) in order to dissolve the RDP pursuant to RCW 26.60.100?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20151005/eca4ae59/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3667 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20151005/eca4ae59/image001.png>