My father has been separated from my mother for about 40 years. He lived with another woman for 10 years after the separation from my mother, and then left that one to live with another one with whom he has been for more than 10. He never legally divorced my mother. He is now retired, receiving SS benefits and a retirement plan from a company. He lives in California, and the second woman has become common law wife seemingly entitled to all benefits of a wife. My father does not want to make a will, and has only appointed beneficiary of his retirement benefits, from the company he worked for, to my mother. Will the common law wife be able to argue those retirement funds, and the social security benefits are hers because of her rights as the common law wife? Or, if my father creates a will designating my mother, his first wife, to be the sole beneficiary override the common law wife benefits? My mother did not work, and hence, all the SS benefits are exclusively through my father's work.
2007-07-21
06:39:14
·
11 answers
·
asked by
kvasir40
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
The legal wife is entitled to the benefits. The common law wife is not recognized by almost any state. The only way the common law wife could get the benefits would be to hire a very aggressive attorney and that attorney would have to establish precedence.
2007-07-21 07:00:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Red 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Common Law Wife California
2016-10-19 03:42:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by pippenger 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If he has never divorced, the second woman does not qualify as a common law wife. More importantly, while some states may (and most do not) still recognize the concept of a common law wife, social security benefits do not. The person entitled to spousal benefits under social security law is the person who was legally the spouse for the longest period of time. As your father is still legally married to your mother for over 40 years, your mother would be the one legally entitled to social security benefits.
Note: The above is my understanding of the Social Security law, your mother should really check with her local office of the Social Security Administration to make sure.
2007-07-21 07:03:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tmess2 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
In the US, very few states still recognize common law marriage.
The concept of common law marriage is that the legal formalities (filling out the license, etc.) can be skipped if the people have lived together as spouses long enough, and have acted in all other ways as if they were married.
California is also a community property state, so proceeds upon the death of a spouse get even more complicated. But California also recognizes a concept called "quasi-marital property" which is property that would be marital (shared) property if the people were legally married and in California.
If your father does not want to make a will, then the probate court will have to go through many complex steps to resolve the issue, and with multiple competing claims, the litigation could drag out for years.
If your father does designate a will, that will cut down the complexity significantly. As far as the SSN benefits specifically, those are federal, and the federal govt does not recognize common law marriage. But a will clarifies any of the potential ambiguities.
2007-07-21 06:58:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
For social security, it wouldn't matter to your mother's status even if they were divorced (unless she remarried):
"If you have been divorced, your former wife or husband who is age 60 or older (50-60 if disabled) can get benefits if your marriage lasted at least 10 years. Your former spouse, however, does not have to meet the age or length-of-marriage rule if he or she is caring for his/her child who is under age 16 or who is disabled and also entitled based on your work. The child must be your former spouse’s natural or legally adopted child. Survivors benefits paid to a divorced spouse will not affect the benefit rates for other survivors getting benefits."
California does not grant common law marriage status. However, if the couple met the requirements for common law marriage in a state that recognized common law marriage, and then moved to California, CA would recognize the couple as married.
2007-07-21 06:46:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Proving a Common Law Marriage
According to the SSA, only evidence to prove that a union existed in a state that recognizes common law marriage can be considered when allocating Social Security benefits. If both spouses are living, this requires a statement from both, as well as a statement from a blood relative. If one of the spouses is deceased, a statement from the surviving spouse and statements from two of the deceased's blood relatives is required. If both spouses are deceased, a statement from a blood relative of both spouses is required to prove that the couple had a common law marriage.
Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_5121602_common-marriage-social-security-benefits.html#ixzz2kIPLHWdt
2013-11-10 12:23:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ron 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I retired 10 years ago. At that time if I had been married to
my first wife for more than 10 years she would be entitled
to benefits, It was something like 9yr. 8mo. It would not
have effected my present wife's benefits. I don't think the
( "other woman" ) is entitled to a dime. It changes every
so often and you should check with your nearest S.S. office.
2007-07-21 06:59:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by wayne g 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
As far as I know, the law does not recognize common law relationships anymore. If your father has not married anyone other than your mother then she (your mother) is entitled to his ss. Or part of it. The common law relationship(s) would not be entitled to anything no matter how hard they tried. Contact the social security administration. They have alot of info. about ss and benefits etc.............
2007-07-21 07:07:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If your father never divorced your mother, then he doesn't have a "common law" wife situation with either of the women he lived with, irrelevant of the time the spend together. That would be polygamy, which is against the law. I don't care if he got remarried by the Pope, if not divorced from wife #1, the subsequent marriage, however facilitated is null and void.
2007-07-21 06:54:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jim 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
first of all, California does not recognize common law marriage. Second, if he never legally divorced his first wife, she is entitled to all benefits upon his death.
2007-07-21 06:44:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by allrightythen 7
·
6⤊
2⤋