NextGen Bar Exam Family Law.

A man and a woman obtained a valid marriage license and exchanged vows at a small ceremony before a friend they both reasonably believed was authorized to officiate. They celebrated with family, moved in together, filed joint tax returns, and lived as a married couple for eight years. It then emerged that the friend’s online ordination had quietly lapsed two months before the wedding, so he technically lacked authority to solemnize marriages. When the couple separated and the woman petitioned to divide their property, the man argued that no valid marriage had ever existed because the officiant lacked authority.

Is the man’s argument that no valid marriage existed likely to succeed?

1. No, because a good-faith ceremonial marriage is valid despite a defect in the officiant's authority. Correct
2. Yes, because solemnization by an authorized officiant is an absolute prerequisite to a valid marriage.
3. Yes, because the couple never cured the defect by holding a second, proper ceremony.
4. No, because the couple's long cohabitation converted the union into a common-law marriage.

A man and a woman decided to marry but never applied for or obtained a marriage license, and they never held any ceremony or exchanged vows before an officiant. They simply began telling friends they were 'married,' moved into a shared home, and merged their bank accounts and finances. Their state does not authorize the formation of common-law marriages. About two years later, the man was hospitalized after a serious accident and could not communicate his wishes. The woman asked to make his medical decisions as his spouse, but a relative disputed that she was married to him.

Is the woman the man’s spouse?

1. Yes, because they held themselves out to the community as a married couple.
2. Yes, because merging their finances and sharing a home satisfies the marriage requirements.
3. No, because a valid marriage requires a written agreement signed by both parties.
4. No, because they neither obtained a license nor were married in any ceremony. Correct

During a weekend trip to a state that performs quick ceremonies, two people who had met only hours earlier drank heavily and, on a dare, went to a 24-hour wedding chapel. They obtained a marriage license and went through a ceremony performed by an authorized officiant. Neither could later remember any part of the ceremony. The next morning both were stunned to discover a signed marriage certificate among their belongings. They immediately parted ways, never lived together, and, within days, one of them filed a petition asking a court to set the marriage aside.

What is the filing party’s strongest ground to have the marriage set aside?

1. The parties failed to satisfy the marriage-license requirement for a valid marriage.
2. Severe intoxication prevented the mutual consent that a valid marriage requires. Correct
3. The marriage was never solemnized by a person authorized to officiate.
4. The parties’ brief acquaintance made the marriage void from its inception.

A law student is preparing for an exam by sorting marriage defects into two groups: those that make a marriage void from the very start, and those that make it merely voidable. She writes five defects on numbered cards: (1) one spouse was already married to a living person at the time of the wedding; (2) the parties are brother and sister; (3) one party was 17 and married without the required judicial approval; (4) one party was too intoxicated to understand the ceremony; and (5) one spouse fraudulently concealed a firm refusal ever to have children.

Which grouping correctly identifies the marriages that are VOID (not merely voidable)?

1. Cards (1) and (2) only. Correct
2. Cards (1), (2), and (3).
3. Cards (3), (4), and (5).
4. Cards (1) through (5), because every defect makes a marriage void.