Multis

Question 1

Which of the following is false about demographic changes in the American family since 1960?

A. The percentage of people married has increased.

B. The percentage of people living together has increased.

C. The rate of nonmarital births has increased.

D. The rate of divorce has increased.

Answer 1

A. The percentage of people married has increased.

Correct. The share of people who are married has decreased. See Kim Parker & Renee Stepler, As U.S. Marriage Rate Hovers at 50%, Education Gap in Marital Status Widens, Pew Res. Ctr. (Sept. 14 2017)

Question 2

Marni and Xavier began dating two years ago and moved in together last year in the town of Clayton. Marni just gave birth to their first child, Sebastian, two months ago. Marni’s mother has moved in to help care for Sebastian. The town of Clayton has moved to evict Xavier. Relevant portions of Clayton’s housing ordinance provide: In addition to those related by marriage, blood, or adoption, those in a “single-family unit,” as defined below, may reside together. A single-family unit consists of no more than two unrelated persons who reside together as a household unit. Xavier is challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance.

What is the most likely result?

A. The ordinance is likely to be struck down because Clayton cannot define a “single-family unit” in a housing ordinance.

B. The ordinance is likely to be struck down because Clayton’s definition of a “single-family unit” is too narrow.

C. The ordinance is likely to be upheld as a valid exercise of Clayton’s regulatory powers.

D. The ordinance is likely to be upheld because Clayton’s definition of “single-family unit” bears a rational relationship to permissible state objectives.

Answer 2

B. The ordinance is likely to be struck down because Clayton’s definition of a “single-family unit” is too narrow.

Correct. In Moore v. City of East Cleveland, the Court struck down a zoning ordinance that provided too limited a definition of family. 431 U.S. 494 (1977). In Moore, all of the household members were related by blood. Here Xavier is a blood relative of Sebastian’s, so the ordinance is likely to be struck down as too limited.

Question 3

Which of the following is inaccurate about contemporary family practice?

A. Family lawyers need knowledge of other fields, such as negotiation, corporations, and tax.

B. Family law involves close work with clients.

C. Family law has a low rate of malpractice claims.

D. Self-representation is becoming more common.

Answer 3

C. Family law has a low rate of malpractice claims.

Correct. This is inaccurate. In addition to higher malpractice claims, family law practitioners may even be subject to more disciplinary complaints than other lawyers. E.g., Barbara Glesner Fines, The Changing Landscape of Disciplinary Risks in Family Law Practice, 50 Fam. L.Q. 367 (2016).

Question 4

Which of the following has not contributed to the financial instability of working and middle-class families?

A. The impact of housing costs on working and middle-class families.

B. The impact of childcare costs on working and middle-class families.

C. Most married-couple families have only one parent in the paid labor market.

D. Wages have stagnated and declined.

Answer 4

C. Most married-couple families have only one parent in the paid labor market.

Correct. In many married-couple families, both parents are employed. In 2018, among married families with children, 63.0 had both parents employed. See U.S. Dep’t of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Characteristics of Families – 2018 (Apr. 18, 2019), https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf. Although having only one parent employed in a two-parent household can contribute to financial instability, most two-parent households need two incomes to support their family.

Question 5

Yasmin and Jake were married two years ago. Yasmin decided to move out two months ago because she had fallen in love with a co-worker, Zeke. Yasmin was recently severely injured in a car accident. The car was driven by Zeke. Yasmin is unable to make her own medical decisions. She has no children, one sibling, Sally, and two devoted parents, Tom and Uma.

Under state law, who is most likely to be the default decision-maker for her?

A. Jake, because Jake is Yasmin’s spouse.

B. Tom and Uma, because they are Yasmin’s parents.

C. Sally, because Sally is Yasmin’s sister.

D. Zeke, because he is Yasmin’s significant other.

Answer 5

A. Jake, because Jake is Yasmin’s spouse.

Correct. When a person is incapacitated, that person’s spouse is normally the default medical decisionmaker in most states, unless the person previously designated an alternative surrogate. E.g., Fla. Stat. Ann. § 765.401 (West 2016). Their recent separation is irrelevant.

Question 6

Sandy and Tim live in a jurisdiction that recognizes the necessaries doctrine. Tim recently had a heart attack and was admitted to a Local Hospital for treatment. After Tim’s recovery, the hospital seeks payment of the expenses from Sandy. Sandy claims that she has no responsibility for Tim’s medical expenses.

If the hospital sues Sandy, how is a court likely to rule?

A. Because the treatment was only for Tim, Sandy will not be held liable.

B. Because the doctrine of necessaries only requires that the husband pays for the wife’s necessaries, Sandy is not responsible.

C. Because the doctrine of necessaries has become gender-neutral in most jurisdictions, Sandy could be held liable.

D. Sandy will not be responsible because the doctrine of necessaries only covers food, housing, and clothing; it does not cover medical expenses.

Answer 6

C Because the doctrine of necessaries has become gender-neutral in most jurisdictions, Sandy could be held liable.

Correct. The doctrine has either been abolished or made gender-neutral in most jurisdictions. E.g., Joan M. Krauskopf et al., § 25:43. Spouse Responsibility for Necessaries—Common Law Necessaries Rule—Modern Changes, 2 Elderlaw Advoc. Aging § 25:43 (2d ed. 2018 update).

Question 7

Isha and Zack are each unmarried and have been living together for 20 years.

Which of the following is an accurate statement of their rights?

A. They can file joint federal tax returns together.

B. They are eligible to receive Social Security benefits based on the other person’s record.

C. Their sexual relationship can be criminalized.

D. They are eligible for a civil protection order against one another.

Answer 7

D. They are eligible for a civil protection order against one another.

Correct. Cohabitants are eligible for civil protection orders against one another.

Question 8

Which of the following has contributed to the pervasiveness of domestic violence in the United States?

A. The common-law domestic chastisement privilege.

B. The family privacy doctrine.

C. Reluctance of law enforcement to arrest perpetrators

D. All of the above.

Answer 8

D. All of the above.

Correct. Because A-C are all correct, the best answer is “D,” all of the above.

Question 9

Which of the following is least likely to result in a civil protection order?

A. One employee sexually assaults another employee.

B. One cohabitant sexually assaults another cohabitant.

C. One spouse sexually assaults the other spouse.

D. One co-parent sexually assaults the other co-parent.

Answer 9

A. One employee sexually assaults another employee.

Correct. The primary goal of a civil protection order is to protect intimate partners or family members. See, e.g., ABA Comm’n on Domestic & Sexual Violence, Domestic Violence Civil Protection Orders (2016). An employee is not an intimate partner or family member. Even though a sexual assault is an act of violence, the victim and offender do not have the requisite relationship.

Question 10

Avery and Reilly were married six years ago and live with their two children. Which of the following is most likely to be successful in establishing the basis for a civil protection order?

A. Avery goes to prison for armed robbery of a bank.

B. Avery moves out of the house to live with a new intimate partner.

C. Avery tells Reilly, “I hate you.”

D. Avery tells Reilly, “I’m going to buy a knife so I can hurt you.”

Answer 10

D. Avery tells Reilly, “I’m going to buy a knife so I can hurt you.”

Correct. A civil protection order is based on some form of family violence. See, e.g., ABA Comm’n on Domestic & Sexual Violence, Domestic Violence Civil Protection Orders (2016), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/domestic_violence1/Charts/migrated_charts/2016%20CPO%20Availability%20Chart.pdf (listing state civil protection order requirements). Avery’s threat qualifies, in most states, as a form of violence.

Question 11

Which of the following types of relief is least likely to be granted in a civil protection order?

A. An order granting temporary child custody.

B. An order granting ownership of shared property.

C. An order to stay away from the petitioner’s residence.

D. An order to stay away from the petitioner’s place of employment.

Answer 11

B. An order granting ownership of shared property.

Correct. Courts are generally not able to grant relief of this sort when issuing a civil protection order. A civil protection order generally only lasts one year or less, and this type of relief is typically not available. E.g., Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-14-105 (West 2019).

Question 12

Shawna has been involved in a physically and emotionally abusive relationship with her intimate romantic partner for several years. She secured a protective order about six months ago, but her partner has continued to stalk and harass her, repeatedly threatening to kill her and the children. She has come to you seeking advice about whether to initiate criminal proceedings.

Which of the following would not be a potential benefit of initiating criminal proceedings as opposed to continued reliance on the civil protective order?

A. The standard of proof.

B. The possibility of mandatory arrest.

C. The use of one prosecutor to follow the case from beginning to end.

D. The use of specialized domestic violence courts.

Answer 12

A. The standard of proof.

Correct. As compared to the standard of proof in the civil protective order context – a preponderance of evidence – the criminal beyond a reasonable doubt standard is a higher threshold and more difficult to satisfy.

Question 13

A legislator in State X seeks to enact a law concerning contraceptives. You are an attorney for the state legislature and have been asked to give advice about federal constitutional limits on state legislation.

Which of the following provisions of the proposed law is most likely to be upheld in the face of a federal constitutional challenge?

A. A provision that bars a married woman from obtaining long-acting reversible contraception.

B. A provision that bars an unmarried woman from obtaining long-acting reversible contraception.

C. A provision that requires a married woman to inform her spouse of her intent to use long-acting reversible contraception.

D. A provision that requires disclosure of information concerning proper use and potential side effects for all forms of birth control.

Answer 13

D. A provision that requires disclosure of information concerning proper use and potential side effects for all forms of birth control.

Correct. This seems an appropriate use of the state’s police power, and there is little infringement on the right to use birth control established in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S 479 (1965) and Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972).

Question 14

Which of the following is true of state marriage regulation?

A. In the 18^th and 19th centuries, states took a restrictive approach to marriage formation.

B. Marriage regulation has remained mostly static over time.

C. Marriage regulation is primarily a state issue that does not implicate federal law.

D. The contemporary trend in marriage law is deregulation.

Answer 14

D. The contemporary trend in marriage law is deregulation.

Correct. This is true. States have both loosened restrictions over entry into marriage, and liberalized divorce law to make marital exit easier.

Question 15

Kathryn and Bradley recently rekindled a childhood romance. After corresponding for several months, Bradley went to visit Kathryn at the Correctional Institute for Women, where she was serving a long-term prison sentence. At their first in-person encounter, Bradly proposed marriage and Kathryn said yes. Bradley went to the County Clerk’s office to request a marriage license. The Clerk told Bradley that under state law, she could not issue a marriage license unless both parties were physically present. The state argues that this requirement helps to ensure both applicants are eligible to marry. Kathryn and Bradly have filed a claim in federal court, arguing that the state policy violates their fundamental right to marry.

How will the court most likely rule?

A. The court will uphold the law as a reasonable regulation that is rationally related to a legitimate state interest.

B. The court will find the law unconstitutional because it treats prison inmates differently than other individuals for the purposes of marriage.

C. The court will uphold the law because Kathryn and Bradley remain free to marry anyone but one another.

D. The court will find the law unconstitutional because it directly and substantially interferes with Kathryn and Bradley’s choice to marry.

Answer 15

D. The court will find the law unconstitutional because it directly and substantially interferes with Kathryn and Bradley’s choice to marry.

Correct. The in-person requirement prevents Bradley and Kathryn from marrying, and cannot be upheld “unless it is supported by sufficiently important state interests and is closely tailored to effectuate only those interests.” Zablocki, 434 U.S. at 388. A court would likely find that the state could use other methods to vindicate its interest in ensuring applicants are eligible to marry. Jones, 215 F.Supp.3d at 572-73.

Question 16

Which of the following quotes most accurately represents the Supreme Court’s holding in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. (2015)?

A. “[A]nyone who wants to get married has a constitutional right to do so.”

B. “[C]lassifications based on sexual orientation are subject to heightened scrutiny.”

C. There exists a “fundamental right to marry . . . under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and therefore any regulation of that right is subject to strict scrutiny.”

D. “The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.”

Answer 16

D “The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.”

Correct. The Obergefell majority held that the state laws at issue violated the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses, and ruled that “the state laws challenged by Petitioners in these cases are now held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.” 135 S.Ct. at 2605.

Question 17

The State of West has longstanding ban on plural marriage. In the wake of Obergefell, however, some of West’s legislators have become concerned about the continued viability of the polygamy ban. You are counsel to the West legislature’s Judiciary Committee. They’ve asked you for the strongest argument, under Obergefell, that polygamy bans remain constitutional.

Which of the following best supports the State of West’s position?

A. “History and tradition guide and discipline [the identification and protection of fundamental rights] but do not set its outer boundaries.” Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 2598 (2015).

B. “[T]he right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals.” Id. at 2599.

C. The marriages at issue in Obergefell “involve only the rights of [] consenting adults whose marriages would pose no risk of harm to themselves or third parties.” Id. at 2607.

D. Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, “liberties extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs.” Id. at 2597.

Answer 17

B. “[T]he right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals.” Id. at 2599.

Correct. This quote would support upholding the polygamy ban. Obergefell’s explicit reference to marriage as a “two-person union unlike any other,” is the clearest basis for distinguishing a polygamy ban from a ban on same-sex marriage.

Question 18

Sarah and Stella marry. A year later, they take genetic tests to learn about their ancestry, and the tests reveal that the two are genetic half-siblings through a common sperm donor.

If a court were to annul their marriage or a prosecutor were to threaten prosecution as a result of the discovery, which reasons for the incest prohibition would be animating the legal response?

A. The destructive influence of intrafamily sexual contact to the protective function of the family, because it introduces sexual imposition, competition, and harmful power dynamics into the family unit.

B. The risk that procreation between individuals sharing close genetic ties will produce children with genetic defects.

C. The taboo against intra-family sexual contact.

D. A focus on relatives by affinity instead of relatives by consanguinity.

Answer 18

C. The taboo against intra-family sexual contact.

Correct. There is a long-standing taboo against intrafamily sexual relations, whether by genetic or adoptive relatives, and the incest prohibition is found in some form in almost all cultures.

Question 19

Anu and Babu are first cousins. They live in a state that prohibits first cousin marriage, but they have many relatives who live in a state that allows first-cousin marriage. On a lengthy stay with those relatives, Anu and Babu married.

When they return to their home state, what will most likely be the status of their marriage?

A Their home state will recognize their marriage only if Anu is pregnant.

B. Their home state will most likely not recognize their marriage because it could not have been contracted under the law of their home state.

C. Their home state will most likely recognize their marriage as valid because it was legally contracted in another state as long as recognition does not offend a very strong public policy of their home state.

D. Their home state will recognize their marriage if they agree not to have children.

Answer 19

C. Their home state will most likely recognize their marriage as valid because it was legally contracted in another state as long as recognition does not offend a very strong public policy of their home state.

Correct. Marriages contracted in one state are generally recognized in a different state, even where they could not be contracted there, unless they contravene a strong public policy of the state deciding whether to recognize.

Question 20

Prohibitions on incest are:

A. A civil ban on certain marriages, not a criminal prohibition on conduct.

B. Criminal only, not a civil ban on certain marriages.

C. Always a civil ban on the same set of marriages that are prohibited in the criminal code.

D. Sometimes a civil ban on a wider set of marriages than are prohibited in the criminal code.

Answer 20

D. Sometimes a civil ban on a wider set of marriages than are prohibited in the criminal code.

Correct. All states prohibit both incestuous marriages as a civil matter and make sexual contact between defined relatives a crime, but some states enumerate a broader set of prohibited marriages than the set of prohibited sexual relationships in the criminal code pertaining to incest.

Question 21

Jerry and Faith marry. Jerry is aware that he is impotent, meaning unable to engage in sexual relations. He does not share this information with Faith, who only learns of it after the marriage.

What consequences could Jerry’s deception have to the marriage?

A Jerry’s deception will void the marriage because making misrepresentations to a potential spouse renders the marriage void.

B. Jerry’s deception will void the marriage because failure to disclose known impotence prior to a marriage renders the marriage void.

C. Faith may seek an annulment of the marriage on the basis of Jerry’s known impotence, but if she does not, the marriage continues to be valid.

D. Faith, having agreed to be Jerry’s husband in sickness and in health, may not annul the marriage on the ground that Jerry concealed impotence, but would instead need to seek a divorce from Jerry in order to end the marriage.

Answer 21

C. Faith may seek an annulment of the marriage on the basis of Jerry’s known impotence, but if she does not, the marriage continues to be valid.

Correct. Faith may seek an annulment of the marriage on the basis of Jerry’s known impotence because impotence can render a marriage voidable, but if she does not, the marriage is not automatically void. Her continued marriage to Jerry would constitute a ratification of the condition.

Question 22

Rachel is 90 years old and suffers from dementia. Annette, Rachel’s 60-year-old caregiver, lives in Rachel’s apartment with her. Rachel and Annette are married through a justice of the peace who comes to the apartment to perform the ceremony, and with Annette’s siblings as witnesses. Two years later, Rachel dies of a stroke. Her children from an earlier marriage seek to deny Annette any rights of inheritance.

What is their strongest claim?

A. Rachel is not a lesbian, as she was married to a man, their father, for 40 years.

B. Rachel could not consent to the marriage because of her dementia, and therefore Annette and Rachel’s marriage is void ab initio.

C. Rachel had a 20-year-old will that did not mention Annette, and so Rachel would not have wanted Annette to exercise her statutory right to an elective share of the estate that overrides the contents of the will.

D. Annette is a golddigger.

Answer 22

B. Rachel could not consent to the marriage because of her dementia, and therefore Annette and Rachel’s marriage is void ab initio.

Correct. A person must have the mental capacity to consent to a marriage, and a marriage contracted by a person without their consent is void ab initio even if the person lacking the capacity to consent is deceased.

Question 23

The difference between a void and a voidable marriage is:

A. A void marriage is a crime, while a voidable marriage simply never occurred.

B. A void marriage may be annulled at the request of one party, but a voidable marriage never existed, regardless of the wishes of the parties.

C. A voidable marriage may be annulled at the request of one party, but a void marriage never existed, regardless of the wishes of the parties.

D. A voidable marriage involves children, while a void marriage is between parties with no children.

Answer 23

C. A voidable marriage may be annulled at the request of one party, but a void marriage never existed, regardless of the wishes of the parties.

Correct. A void marriage never occurred in the eyes of the law, while a voidable marriage may be annulled at the request of one party.

Question 24

Karinne meets Yusef online on a dating app. Yusef’s profile indicates that he is wealthy, and works as a mergers and acquisitions attorney at a NYC law firm. In fact, Yusef is a con man, who has no assets, and has creditors chasing him. He proposes to Karinne after 6 weeks of dating, in part because he realizes that she is both wealthy and well-connected. A few months into the marriage, Karinne discovers that Yusef is not going to work as an attorney, but instead is spending his days in coffee shops. He has no college or law school degree.

How will Karinne be able to end the marriage?

A. She can seek an annulment on the ground that Yusef is a social climber.

B. She can divorce Yusef.

C. She can seek an annulment on a claim of fraud as to the essentials of the marriage.

D. None of the above.

Answer 24

B. She can divorce Yusef.

Correct. Karinne can divorce Yusef.

Question 25

Ginger and Red are out drinking one night in Las Vegas. They wake up the next morning and notice a signed wedding license and photos of themselves at the Elvis chapel getting married. Further investigation with the chapel confirms that they did in fact participate in a marriage ceremony the night before. Ginger is a billionaire, while Red has no assets.

Which of the following will Ginger likely claim:

A. The marriage should be annulled because the marriage was contracted under conditions of duress.

B. The marriage should be annulled because of fraud as to the essentials of the marriage.

C. The marriage should be annulled because both parties were too intoxicated to give consent to the marriage.

D. The marriage should be annulled because it has not been consummated.

Answer 25

C. The marriage should be annulled because both parties were too intoxicated to give consent to the marriage.

Correct. Intoxication can lead a court to conclude that the parties did not consent to the marriage, and lack of consent is a ground for granting an annulment.

Question 26

Nina, age 15, becomes pregnant from a relationship with her neighbor, Sergio, age 26. Nina’s father Fredo is pressuring Nina and Sergio to marry. Sergio is not certain whether marrying Nina is a legal option.

Which of the following will make it harder for Sergio and Nina to get married?

A. Nina’s pregnancy.

B. Nina’s father’s support and encouragement of the marriage.

C. Sergio and Nina’s residence in a state where the marriage statute observes the common law minimum ages.

D. Judicial review and approval of the marriage.

E. None of the above.

Answer 26

E. None of the above.

Correct. Sergio and 15 year old Nina’s marriage would be made easier, not harder, by her pregnancy, her father’s consent, living in a state that observes the low common law ages for marriage, and judicial approval.

Question 27

Some states have raised the age of marriage out of concern for:

A. The ability of a minor to consent.

B. The practice of forced marriages.

C. The fact that girls who marry as minors are less likely to graduate from high school and college and more likely to suffer domestic abuse and to live in poverty.

D. The persistent prevalence of marriages involving a minor in the United States.

E. All of the above.

Answer 27

E. All of the above.

Correct. Concerns about consent, forced marriage, the risks to educational completion, domestic violence, poverty, and the persistent prevalence of marriage of minors in the United States all motivate the movement to raise the marriage age.

Question 28

Naomi and Meredith decide that they want to be married. They are intelligent and educated, and they are somewhat anti-establishment. They object to the idea that anyone should have a say in deciding what makes them married. They decide to have a truly private ceremony—just the two of them, in their own home, and declare themselves married. They intend to keep their marriage a secret from all others.

In a later dispute over the validity of this marriage, a court is likely to scrutinize which deficiencies in their marriage formality?

A. A judge will scrutinize their apparent lack of a license.

B. A judge will scrutinize the lack of witnesses to the marriage and its secrecy.

C. A judge will scrutinize their lack of an officiant.

D. All of the Above.

Answer 28

D. All of the Above.

Correct. A judge will scrutinize their lack of an officiant, their secrecy, lack of witnesses, and lack of a license in considering the validity of their marriage.

Question 29

States that impose waiting periods prior to marriage:

A. Unduly burden the fundamental right to marry in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

B. Do so to allow for the results of required blood tests to be returned before the marriage can be solemnized.

C. Will waive them in some places if the parties agree to premarital counseling.

D. Are rare.

Answer 29

C. Will waive them in some places if the parties agree to premarital counseling.

Correct. In a few states, the waiting period can be waived if the parties agree to premarital counseling designed to improve the stability and longevity of the marriage.

Question 30

In a State that continues to recognize common law marriage, Keenan and Letitia did not have a wedding ceremony or obtain a license but could be considered married if they meet certain criteria.

Which of the following criteria will not be relevant to the finding of a marriage?

A. Their capacity to marry.

B. Their agreement to be married.

C. Their cohabitation for a period not less than seven years.

D. Their holding themselves out to the community as husband and wife.

Answer 30

C. Their cohabitation for a period not less than seven years.

Correct. There is no “seven-year” criterion for common law marriage, and there is no length of time couples must reside together.

Question 31

Alfonzo and Sequoia share a religious belief that couples should be married before they cohabit. Sequoia, however, has substantial debt, and neither wants Alfonzo to become responsible to her creditors. They agree to exchange marriage vows with their families as witnesses. They hyphenate their last names to create a shared last name, and they introduce themselves to their friends as married.

If they later move to New York state, and Sequoia then seeks to terminate the relationship, what will she need to do?

A. She can simply move out and the relationship termination requires no legal intervention, because New York State is not a common law marriage state.

B. If neither their state of origin nor New York state recognize common law marriage, she can move out and the relationship termination requires no legal intervention, unless they have children, in which case they will need to obtain a divorce in New York.

C. She must obtain a divorce in court in New York, even though New York is not a common law marriage state, if their state of origin is a common law marriage state.

D. She must obtain a divorce in court in New York, even though New York is not a common law marriage state, whether or not their state of origin is a common law marriage state.

Answer 31

C. She must obtain a divorce in court in New York, even though New York is not a common law marriage state if their state of origin is a common law marriage state.

Correct. Alfonzo and Sequoia meet the criteria for a common-law marriage, and once properly contracted in a common-law marriage state, they are married and must seek a legal divorce regardless of their current state of residence.

Question 32

Which of the following is not a reason that states have eliminated common law marriage?

A. States eliminated common law marriage because clergy and other officiants who could solemnize a marriage are much more readily available than they were in the past.

B. States eliminated common law marriage because the rise in statutes and regulations relying on marital status to determine benefit entitlements placed pressure for greater clarity as to the status.

C. States eliminated common law marriage because the urgency of legitimizing children declined as the law changed to allow children rights of support and inheritance regardless of whether their parents were ever married.

D. States eliminated common law marriage because stigma lessened surrounding single women and cohabitation without marriage.

E. States eliminated common law marriage to raise more revenue.

Answer 32

E. States eliminated common law marriage to raise more revenue.

Correct. States did not eliminate common law marriage to raise revenue. Each of the other answers was a motivating factor in eliminating common law marriage.

Question 33

Lee and Amy met 10 years ago and began a romantic relationship soon after. At the time their relationship began, Lee was married to Wendy. Several years into the relationship, Lee met with his attorney and requested a divorce from Wendy. Lee told Amy that he had divorced Wendy. The following month, Amy and Lee had a small wedding in Las Vegas. Although Wendy knew Lee had been previously married, she believed Lee’s representation that his divorce was finalized. In fact, the divorce was not finalized until several weeks after the Las Vegas wedding. Amy has filed a motion asking the family court to nullify her marriage; Lee has filed a cross-motion seeking recognition as Amy’s putative spouse.

How will the court most likely rule on Lee’s request?

A. The court will deny Lee’s request because Amy did not have a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage.

B. The court will deny Lee’s request because Lee did not have a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage.

C. The court will grant Lee’s request because Lee had a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage.

D. The court will grant Lee’s request because Amy had a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage.

Answer 33

B. The court will deny Lee’s request because Lee did not have a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage.

Correct. The putative spouse doctrine provides marriage-like remedies to an innocent spouse at the end of a putative marriage where one or both parties participated in the marriage ceremony with a good-faith belief in its validity. “Good faith” is the honest, reasonable belief that the marriage was valid at the time of the ceremony. On these facts, a court would likely find that Lee should not have had a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage unless or until he received notice from his attorney that his prior marriage was dissolved.

Question 34

Which of the following family law doctrines or practices is not a reflection of the common law doctrine of coverture?

A. The convention of a wife adopting the husband’s surname upon marriage.

B. Historical bans on women’s employment outside the home.

C. The common law duty of support.

D. The contemporary doctrine of necessaries.

Answer 34

D. The contemporary doctrine of necessaries.

Correct. States that retain the doctrine of necessaries have made it gender-neutral. Historically, the doctrine was related to the wife’s legal disabilities during marriage and her husband’s duty to support her. It was gender-specific and permitted the wife to purchase items from third parties using her husband’s credit. See 1 William Blackstone’s Commentaries 442-45 (1765) (“The husband is bound to provide his wife with necessaries by law, as much as himself; and, if she contracts for them, he is obliged to pay them.”).

Question 35

Lynn and Gene have been married for ten years, but the marriage has become increasingly strained because of Lynn’s preoccupation with Lynn’s business. Lynn has become verbally and physically abusive of Gene. About a year ago, Gene overhead Lynn on the phone with an unknown individual discussing a transfer of $50,000 “after you’ve completed the job.” When Gene confronted Lynn, Lynn told Gene that Lynn had hired someone to kill Lynn’s business partner, and threatened to kill Gene if Gene told anyone. Several weeks later, Lynn’s business partner was robbed at home and killed. Lynn is now on trial for murder. The prosecution seeks to call Gene as a witness, and Lynn argues that Lynn’s communications with Gene were privileged and should be precluded.

How will the court rule?

A. The court will permit Gene’s testimony because at the time Gene overheard the conversation, Lynn and Gene’s marriage was strained.

B. The court will permit Gene’s testimony because Lynn has been verbally and physically abusing Gene, and has threatened Gene with physical harm.

C. The court will permit Gene’s testimony because Gene wants to testify.

D. The court will permit Gene’s testimony because the telephone conversation Gene overheard was not intended by Lynn to convey a message to Gene.

Answer 35

B. The court will permit Gene’s testimony because Lynn has been verbally and physically abusing Gene, and has threatened Gene with physical harm.

Correct. “[C]ourts have long recognized an exception to the [marital communications] privilege when one spouse commits an offense against the other, thereby harming the marital relationship and thwarting the privilege’s purpose.” United States v. Breton, 740 F.3d 1, 10 (1^st Cir. 2014).

Question 36

Bob and Chandra have lived together for 20 years and have three joint children. Bob and Chandra were riding bicycles together when Bob was struck by a car. He was hospitalized for several months. Chandra experienced great emotional distress as a result of the accident. Bob has now recovered.

Which of the following is the most likely result of a loss of consortium claim brought by Chandra?

A. The court will dismiss the case because Bob ultimately recovered.

B. Even if the claim would have been permitted if Bob and Chandra were married, the court will dismiss the case because Bob and Chandra are not married.

C. If the claim would have been permitted if Bob and Chandra were married, then the court will allow the case to go forward.

D. If Chandra has adequate proof for a loss of consortium claim, then the court will allow the case to go forward.

Answer 36

B. Even if the claim would have been permitted if Bob and Chandra were married, the court will dismiss the case because Bob and Chandra are not married.

Correct. The court is likely to dismiss the case, because, in most states, nonmarital cohabitants do not have the same tort claims as married couples. See Vance v. Farmers Ins. Co., No. 76092-1-I, 2017 WL 4883353, at *4 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 30, 2017), review denied, 412 P.3d 1260 (Wash. 2018) (describing New Mexico as only state permitting loss of consortium claims for unmarried cohabitants).

Question 37

During his marriage to Therese, Assad was injured in a car accident that was not his fault, and his spinal cord was severed. Because of the accident, he could no longer work as a physical therapist. He recovered $1.5 million in economic damages for lost wages and medical care, and $500,000 in pain and suffering damages. Therese recovered $200,000 in loss of consortium damages (for impairment to their relationship). They divorce two years after the accident because Assad has fallen in love with his occupational therapist.

What will be considered marital property subject to distribution at divorce?

A. The entire tort judgment is marital property.

B. The $500,000 in pain and suffering damages are marital property, but the rest is separate.

C. The $200,000 in loss of consortium damages are marital property, but the rest is separate.

D. The $1.5 million in economic damages are marital property, but the rest is separate.

Answer 37

D. The $1.5 million in economic damages are marital property, but the rest is separate.

Correct. The economic damages are marital property, but the pain and suffering damages are individual to Assad and his separate property, while the loss of consortium damages are individual to Therese and her separate property.

Question 38

Which of the following is the strongest indication that marriage is a status rather than a contract?

A Marriage requires the consent of both parties.

B. The state may change the consequences of a marriage without the consent of those who are married and apply that change retroactively to those who are married.

C. Parties to a marriage may modify the impact of an impending marriage on their post-divorce property rights.

D. Parties to a marriage may modify the impact of an impending marriage on their obligations to provide maintenance in the event of a divorce.

Answer 38

B. The state may change the consequences of a marriage without the consent of those who are married and apply that change retroactively to those who are married.

Correct. The state may modify by statute or case law the consequences of marriage with respect to public law such as tax liability or private law such as changes in post-divorce maintenance obligations, and those changes bind married couples although they did not consent to them at the time they consented to the marriage. These laws depend on marital status and do not implicate any agreement between spouses.

Question 39

Which of the following is false about the private ordering of marriage?

A. Courts are more supportive of private ordering than they were 100 years ago.

B. Marriage is not a default contract, because the parties may not modify all of its terms and legal consequences, because they are instead bound by some obligations that cannot be waived.

C. A majority of couples now execute a premarital agreement before they marry.

D. Almost all couples execute a separation agreement when they divorce.

Answer 39

C. A majority of couples now execute a premarital agreement before they marry.

Correct. It is false that a majority of couples now execute a premarital agreement before they marry. While data is thin, practitioners estimate that fewer than 10% of couples have a premarital agreement.

Question 40

The original Uniform Premarital Agreement Act promulgated in 1983 has been adopted in some form in 25 states. It departed from conventional contract rules in the enforcement of premarital agreements in that:

A. It allows for a contract to be enforced even when its terms are unconscionable.

B. It requires voluntary consent.

C. It requires separate consideration beyond the marriage itself.

D. It requires premarital agreements to be in writing.

Answer 40

A. It allows for a contract to be enforced even when its terms are unconscionable.

Correct. In conventional contract law, contracts that are unconscionable will not be enforced. The UPAA, however, allows for the enforcement of an unconscionable agreement as long as the parties voluntarily consented to the agreement and received fair and reasonable disclosure or reasonably could have had sufficient knowledge of the relevant information.

Question 41

Which of the following is more characteristic of the Uniform Premarital Agreement than it is of the ALI provisions on premarital agreements?

A. More states build their law around the UPAA than the ALI.

B. Under the UPAA, freedom of contract is more fully subordinated to individual and family welfare than under the ALI.

C. Under the UPAA, terms will sometimes be reviewed for substantive unfairness based on events that have arisen since the time the agreement was executed, but not under the ALI.

D. Under the UPAA, a rebuttable presumption of informed consent is extended if the agreement was executed at least 30 days before the parties’ marriage, among other safeguards, but not under the ALI.

Answer 41

A. More states build their law around the UPAA than the ALI.

Correct. Approximately half of the states have adopted some form of the UPAA, while the ALI has not been adopted on this subject.

Question 42

Which of the following disclosures are ordinarily required in order to create an enforceable premarital agreement?

A. The parties’ assets and income.

B. The parties’ health.

C. The legal outcomes that would apply in the absence of the agreement.

D. None of these disclosures are required.

Answer 42

A. The parties’ assets and income.

Correct. Ordinarily, disclosure of assets and income is included in premarital agreements because it increases the likelihood of enforcement.

Question 43

Which of the following issues related to disclosure will not be relevant to determining whether a party entered into a premarital agreement voluntarily as required for enforcement upon divorce?

A. Whether the parties are judged to be in a confidential relationship, giving rise to fiduciary obligations, prior to their marriage date under state law.

B. Whether the parties disclosed the existence of adult children from a prior marriage.

C. Whether the parties provided full disclosure of assets.

D. Whether the parties provided full disclosure of earnings.

Answer 43

B. Whether the parties disclosed the existence of adult children from a prior marriage.

Correct. Parties have no obligation to disclose the existence of adult children from a prior marriage before signing an enforceable premarital agreement.

Question 44

Diego and Lisa decide to marry after years of uncertainty about the status of their relationship. Diego is wealthy and owns a share of a family business, and he is a high earner. He wishes to have a premarital agreement to protect his assets. It is the first marriage for both. Lisa is concerned that Diego will not be faithful during the marriage. Because Diego has had health problems and smokes, Lisa is also worried about his future health care expenses. Lisa is also concerned that Diego will not stick around if the going gets rough.

Which of the provisions below would be most likely to be reliably enforced in a premarital agreement and thereby achieve its intended protective effects?

A. If either party seeks a divorce in the absence of a finding that the other party has committed adultery, deserted the marriage, or been physically abusive, all marital property will go to the party who is not seeking the divorce.

B. All children of the marriage will be raised in the Jewish faith.

C. All property held by Diego before the marriage will remain his alone, and any property acquired during the marriage will be divided 1/3 to Diego and 2/3 to Lisa in the event of a divorce.

D. Any health care bills acquired during the marriage are the sole responsibility of the patient.

Answer 44

C. All property held by Diego before the marriage will remain his alone, and any property acquired during the marriage will be divided 1/3 to Diego and 2/3 to Lisa in the event of a divorce.

Correct. In virtually all states, an appropriately executed premarital agreement that makes adequate provision for both parties will be enforced, even if it leaves one party worse off than under the equitable distribution statute.

Question 45

Which of the following is unlikely to prevent enforcement of a premarital agreement?

A. Presentation of the Premarital Agreement the night before the wedding.

B. One party’s infidelity.

C. Inability of the party challenging enforcement to access the advice of legal counsel before signing the agreement.

D. Allocation of the entire marital estate and all future income to one party, with allocation of all debt to the other, and with the allocation of all assets owned prior to the marriage to those who brought it to the marriage, where it leaves one party with no income or assets.

Answer 45

B. One party’s infidelity.

Correct. Infidelity plays no role in the enforceability of premarital agreements.

Question 46

Which of the following provisions of a premarital agreement is least likely to be enforced?

A. A provision stating that in the event of the death of either party, the surviving spouse will not seek to exercise an elective share against the estate of the deceased spouse [that could lower the amount received by the deceased spouse’s children.

B. A provision stating that in the event of a divorce, each spouse will be assigned all property owned by that spouse prior to entering the marriage, and all increase in value on that property.

C. A provision stating that any children born to the marriage will reside full-time with their mother in the event of a divorce.

D. A provision stating that no party will receive spousal maintenance for longer than five years in the event of a divorce.

Answer 46

C. A provision stating that any children born to the marriage will reside full-time with their mother in the event of a divorce.

Correct. Provisions relating to care and custody of children in a premarital agreement are not enforceable unless they are for the benefit of the children and are consistent with the best interests of the children.

Question 47

The American Law Institute provides that a court may refuse to enforce a provision of a premarital agreement that is fair at the time the agreement is executed where a substantial injustice may occur in the light of the following changed circumstances, except which one:

A. A fixed number of years have passed since its signing.

B. A child of one party by a prior marriage requests a re-evaluation of the agreement.

C. A child was born to, or adopted by, the parties, who at the time of execution had no children in common.

D. There has been a change in circumstances that has a substantial impact on the parties or their children, but when they executed the agreement the parties probably did not anticipate either the change, or its impact.

Answer 47

B. A child of one party by a prior marriage requests a re-evaluation of the agreement.

Correct. The ALI does not provide for challenge to a premarital agreement by adult children of either party.

Question 48

Postnuptial Agreements, though generally enforceable, differ from premarital agreements in all of the following ways except:

A. The parties to postnuptial agreements are in all jurisdictions formally in a confidential relationship and have a fiduciary duty to one another, but not in all premarital agreements.

B. Courts may give greater scrutiny to the bargaining context of postnuptial agreements than premarital agreements.

C. Courts are more likely to treat a postnuptial agreement like a separation agreement than they are to treat a premarital agreement like a separation agreement.

D. The courts will limit the conditions of a postnuptial agreement to property distribution, but allow for the negotiation of other terms in a premarital agreement.

Answer 48

D. The courts will limit the conditions of a postnuptial agreement to property distribution, but allow for the negotiation of other terms in a premarital agreement.

Correct. Courts do not limit the terms of a postnuptial agreement or a premarital agreement to property distribution.

Question 49

Charlie and Devon have been living together in California for a decade and have just dissolved their relationship. During that time, Charlie worked for an investment company, and consistently invested most of his earnings in the stock market. Those investments are now worth $1 million. Devon worked as a teacher, and has little in savings. However, Devon has contributed to a retirement account that is now valued at $200,000, although Devon won’t begin receiving distributions for another 20 years.

What is the most likely resolution of any property dispute over the investments and the retirement account?

A. An agreement between Charlie and Devon concerning the property acquired during the cohabitation is not likely to be enforced.

B. An agreement between Charlie and Devon concerning property acquired during the cohabitation is likely to be enforced.

C. In the absence of an agreement between Charlie and Devon, a court will order both the investments and the retirement account to be divided equitably.

D. In the absence of an agreement between Charlie and Devon, a court will order the investment account to be divided, but Devon will retain the retirement account because there is no present right to the assets.

Answer 49

B. An agreement between Charlie and Devon concerning property acquired during the cohabitation is likely to be enforced.

Correct. Most jurisdictions enforce agreements between nonmarital cohabitants provided they do not rest explicitly on “meretricious” consideration, and only a few do not. E.g., Kristine L. Tungol, Cause of Action by Same-Sex or Heterosexual Unmarried Cohabitant to Enforce Agreement or Understanding Regarding Support or Division of Property on Dissolution of Relationship, 35 Causes of Action 2d 295 (2019).

Question 50

Greta and Jeremy have been living together for five years. Jeremy is changing jobs and would like to be added to Greta’s health insurance. They do not want to marry.

Which of these answers is most likely to be accurate about their rights?

A. Jeremy cannot be added to Greta’s insurance unless they are married.

B. Jeremy and Greta can enter into an agreement that ensures that he will be added.

C. Because most jurisdictions allow for domestic partnerships or civil unions, they should enter into a civil union or domestic partnership.

D. Greta should check with her employer about its policies on adding nonmarital partners.

Answer 50

D. Greta should check with her employer about its policies on adding nonmarital partners.

Correct. Some employers allow for a nonmarital partner to be added, regardless of the existence of a civil union or domestic partnership statute.

Question 51

Tina and Victor seek to enter into a civil union, which is permitted in their jurisdiction.

Which of the following would not serve as a bar to that status?

A. Tina is married to William, but they separated twenty years ago and have not lived together since.

B. Tina and Victor are first cousins. First cousins cannot marry in their jurisdiction, but can in all of the surrounding jurisdictions.

C. Tina is 17, Victor is 18, and Tina’s parents oppose the union.

D. Tina is divorced from Ricky, Victor is divorced from Patty.

Answer 51

D. Tina is divorced from Ricky, Victor is divorced from Patty.

Correct. A party must be eligible to be married to enter into a civil union. Because Tina and Victor are not married to anyone else, they can marry each other, and therefore they can enter into a civil union together.

Question 52

Ursula and Yuan seek to enter into a civil union, which is permitted in their jurisdiction.

Which of the following would serve as a bar to that status?

A. Ursula and Yuan do not want to participate in a ceremony.

B. Once they have registered, Ursula and Yuan do not want to let anyone else know they have entered into a civil union.

C. Ursula and Yuan do not want to have children.

D. Ursula is in another civil union with Xerxes.

Answer 52

D. Ursula is in another civil union with Xerxes.

Correct. A party can only be in one civil union at a time, so Ursula cannot enter into a civil union with Yuan until she dissolves her existing one with Xerxes.

Question 53

Jamily and Kerry are each unmarried and have been living together for 21 years. Jamily is an architect, and Kerry is an accountant who has worked part-time and has had primary responsibility for the couple’s two children. They recently separated. Kerry has sued for palimony, meaning ongoing payments comparable to alimony.

Which of the following is an accurate statement of their rights?

A. Most jurisdictions will award Kerry palimony because they would have awarded alimony to Kerry if they had been married.

B. Most jurisdictions will not award Kerry palimony because they would not have awarded alimony to Kerry if they had been married.

C. Most jurisdictions will not award Kerry palimony unless the parties had an agreement otherwise.

D. Most jurisdictions will award palimony to Kerry because of the long-term nature of the nonmarital relationship.

Answer 53

C. Most jurisdictions will not award Kerry palimony unless the parties had an agreement otherwise.

Correct. Where there is an agreement to provide palimony between nonmarital couples, most courts will enforce it.

Question 54

Charles and Dina were living together. Dina was an art dealer, and, about five years ago, she decided to buy an expensive piece of art as a personal investment. She didn’t have enough money to buy the art on her own. When she told Charles about it, he responded that it was a great idea and that he could give her part of the purchase price. Because Dina was in the art business, he told her he didn’t want his name on the title. Charles and Dina recently split up and Charles wants a share of the art and its appreciated value.

Which of the following is accurate in most jurisdictions?

A. A constructive trust could be imposed, even though title is exclusively in Dina’s name.

B. A constructive trust could not be imposed, because title is exclusively in Dina’s name.

C. A constructive trust could be imposed, because they explicitly agreed to share ownership, just not title.

D. A constructive trust could not be imposed, because there is no written agreement.

Answer 54

A. A constructive trust could be imposed, even though title is exclusively in Dina’s name.

Correct. A constructive trust is an equitable remedy, which may be imposed where the person in possession of the property would be unjustly enriched were that person permitted to retain that property. Charles might be able to show that Dina has been unjustly enriched by his contributions.

Question 55

Under the approach proposed by the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution, which of the following is an accurate statement concerning recognition of domestic partners?

A. The partners must have a child together to be recognized as domestic partners.

B. The partners must live together for at least five years to be recognized as domestic partners.

C. The parties must maintain a common household to be recognized as domestic partners.

D. The parties must have an express agreement to be domestic partners.

Answer 55

C. The parties must maintain a common household to be recognized as domestic partners.

Correct. The ALI requires that the parties maintain a common household to establish a domestic partnership. Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution § 6.03 (2002).

Question 56

Annulment is different from divorce in which of the following ways?

A. Annulment does not fully terminate the relationship between the parties.

B. Annulment does not require grounds in the way that divorce does.

C. Divorce declares marriage and its consequences void from the outset, while annulment ends a marriage at the time of the annulment order.

D. Annulment declares a marriage and its consequences void from the outset, while a divorce ends a marriage at the time of the divorce order.

Answer 56

D. Annulment declares a marriage and its consequences void from the outset, while a divorce ends a marriage at the time of the divorce order.

Correct. Annulment declares a marriage and its consequences void from the outset, while a divorce ends a marriage at the time of the divorce order.

Question 57

The likelihood that a marriage will end in divorce is decreased where:

A. Marriage happens at a later age.

B. The parties enjoy relatively high household income.

C. The parties are entering into their first marriage.

D. The parties enjoy a relatively high level of education.

E. Likelihood of divorce is decreased by all of the above.

Answer 57

E. Likelihood of divorce is decreased by all of the above.

Correct. The likelihood of divorce is decreased by older age, high income, and absence of previous divorce, and high educational attainment.

Question 58

Ecclesiastical courts in England conceived of legal separation and annulments (the precursors to absolute divorce) as punishment for marital wrongdoing.

Which of the following was a consequence of that understanding when divorce first moved to civil courts in England in 1857, as well as in courts in early U.S. history:

A. Divorce required a finding of fault by one party.

B. Divorce required that the petitioning party be innocent of fault.

C. Divorce required a fact-finding by a civil court.

D. All of the Above.

Answer 58

D. All of the Above.

Correct. Divorce required a fact-finding of fault in a civil court, and could not be obtained if the petitioning party was also guilty of marital fault.

Question 59

California became the first to adopt no-fault divorce due largely to:

A. Distress among children who were being called as witnesses to marital fault.

B. Corruption of the divorce process due to perjury and other artifices aimed at demonstrating fault where it did not exist but where the parties agreed to divorce.

C. Controversy over financial settlements at divorce that disproportionately favored wrongdoers.

D. None of the Above.

Answer 59

B. Corruption of the divorce process due to perjury and other artifices aimed at demonstrating fault where it did not exist but where the parties agreed to divorce.

Correct. The harshness of the fault regime meant that even consenting parties could not obtain a divorce if neither had committed legal fault. Therefore, consenting couples often fabricated stories of fault, and critics of fault-based divorce felt that these fabrications undermined the integrity of the courts.

Question 60

Jin and Alicia, married for 4 years, have a lengthy discussion one evening triggered by a disagreement over chores. Over the course of the 6 hour discussion, Jin and Alicia unload all of their grievances on one another, and decide that they need to divorce. Jin moves out of the marital home the next morning.

Because they both agree to this divorce:

A. They will be able to obtain the divorce immediately.

B. They will be able to obtain the divorce as soon as they have agreed on the division of assets.

C. They will likely not obtain the divorce until the passage of a statutorily determined waiting period between the time they separate and the time they can obtain a divorce.

D. Their agreement will have no impact on the length of time it will take for a court to grant the divorce.

Answer 60

C. They will likely not obtain the divorce until the passage of a statutorily determined waiting period between the time they separate and the time they can obtain a divorce.

Correct. Most states have a mandatory separation period before a court will grant a divorce, even when the divorce is sought by mutual consent.

Question 61

Adultery as a legal ground for divorce is limited in the following ways:

A. Adultery requires sexual intercourse.

B. Adultery must occur when a couple is still cohabiting.

C. Adultery cannot be a ground for divorce if it is limited to only online activity.

D. Adultery requires direct proof of sexual intercourse.

Answer 61

C. Adultery cannot be a ground for divorce if it is limited to only online activity.

Correct. While cultural sources identify “virtual infidelity” and “emotional” affairs as a form of adultery, the legal definition of adultery as a ground for divorce requires physical sexual contact, and does not extend to online behavior.

Question 62

The rate of divorce in the United States is:

A. 50%.

B. Rising.

C. Declining.

D. Increasing because the rate of marriage is increasing.

Answer 62

C. Declining.

Correct. The divorce rate increased in the 1970s and 1980s, perhaps in response to the widespread adoption of no-fault divorce in the 1970s, but it has declined steadily since the 1980s.

Question 63

After marriage counseling, Sasha forgives her spouse Ali’s infidelity, Ali ends his extramarital affair, and they reconcile. Six months later, Sasha has a change of heart, and seeks a divorce on the grounds of adultery, because fault grounds will speed a divorce and would put her on the best footing in her claim for spousal maintenance.

What defense will Ali raise to the fault grounds of adultery?

A. Recrimination.

B. Provocation.

C. Connivance.

D. Condonation.

Answer 63

D. Condonation.

Correct. Condonation is a defense to fault grounds where a victim of fault has forgiven the offender and only later attempts to raise the conduct for which the offender was forgiven.

Question 64

As a ground for divorce, cruelty requires:

A. A finding of physical conflict.

B. An order of protection from a court with domestic violence jurisdiction.

C. A threat to the pleading spouse’s life.

D. None of the above.

Answer 64

D. None of the above.

Correct. None of the answers above are requirements for the granting of a divorce on the ground of cruelty. Cruelty as a fault ground consists of “conduct . . . on the part of the husband or wife which is calculated to seriously impair the health or permanently destroy the happiness of the other.” Das v. Das, 754 A.2d 441 (2000).

Question 65

Khalil and Heba decide to separate because they both agree that Khalil’s mental health struggles at times cause him to engage in behavior that is frightening and disruptive to their children, and their children’s therapist has indicated that the children need a more stable home environment.

Which of the following is not a reason that they might choose to formalize a legal separation instead of a divorce because:

A. They want to be certain that neither will be able to inherit assets from the other at the time of either of their deaths.

B. They hope to reconcile when the children are grown.

C. Khalil is dependent on Heba’s health insurance.

D. They believe that divorce violates their religious commitments and neither seeks to remarry.

Answer 65

A. They want to be certain that neither will be able to inherit assets from the other at the time of either of their deaths.

Correct. This is not a reason to choose separation over divorce. As long as they remain married, even though legally separated, they retain the right of elective share against each other’s estates in the event of the death of one of them.

Question 66

Penny and Victor have one minor child, Nahla. They live in the State of W. Victor has been abusive to Penny over the past few years, and he recently threatened Nahla. Penny decided to leave the family home and took Nahla with her to a shelter in neighboring State Y last month. She seeks custody of Nahla and consults a lawyer affiliated with the shelter about whether the State Y courts have subject matter jurisdiction.

What advice will the lawyer give?

A. The State Y courts can exercise temporary jurisdiction because it is necessary in an emergency to protect Nahla from the threatened abuse.

B. The State Y courts can exercise jurisdiction because Nahla and one of her parents are currently present there.

C. The State Y courts cannot exercise jurisdiction because Nahla’s home state is the State of W.

D. The State Y courts cannot exercise jurisdiction because Victor remains in State W.

Answer 66

A. The State Y courts can exercise temporary jurisdiction because it is necessary in an emergency to protect Nahla from the threatened abuse.

Correct. A state court may assume temporary jurisdiction over a custody dispute if the child is present in the state and it is “necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse.” Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) § 204.

Question 67

Opal and Jack previously lived together in the State of Orleans. Three months ago, Opal gave birth to their child, Pearl. Because she was unhappy in the relationship with Jack, Opal took Pearl and moved back home to live with her mother, in the State of Clayton when she left the hospital after Pearl’s birth. Opal’s job has permitted her to transfer from its office in the State of Orleans to its office in the State of Clayton. Jack has filed for custody in the State of Orleans. Will an Orleans court find it has jurisdiction?

A. Yes. Opal and Jack conceived Pearl in Orleans and Opal lived there throughout her pregnancy.

B. Yes. Jack is the father and lives in Orleans.

C. No. Opal is the mother and lives in Clayton.

D. No. Pearl has lived in Clayton since her birth.

Answer 67

D. No. Pearl has lived in Clayton since her birth.

Correct. The UCCJEA prioritizes home state jurisdiction in Section 201. For a child less than six months (like Pearl), of age, the home state is where the child has lived since birth with a parent. Pearl has lived in Clayton since birth. UCCJEA § 102(7).

Question 68

Marisa and Tomas separated one year ago, and a court in State C awarded Marisa custody of their two children during the week, while Tomas received visitation every weekend. Marisa moved to neighboring State N six months ago. Marisa filed a motion to modify the custody decree in State N. How is the court likely to rule?

A. The court is likely to hold it has jurisdiction because Marisa and the children now reside in State N.

B. The court is likely to hold it has jurisdiction because the children have now resided in State N for six months.

C. The court is likely to hold it does not have jurisdiction because the initial decree was issued less than two years ago.

D. The court is likely to hold it does not have jurisdiction because Tomas still lives in State C.

Answer 68

D. The court is likely to hold it does not have jurisdiction because Tomas still lives in State C.

Correct. UCCJEA § 202 provides that the issuing state has continuing exclusive, jurisdiction until neither parent nor the child still lives in the state. State C was the issuing court and Tomas still lives in State C. See Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) § 203.

Question 69

Quinn and Peyton are married and have been living in State A. Quinn gave birth seven months ago to their child. Peyton has been unhappy in the relationship, and, before Quinn came home from the hospital with their child, Peyton moved to State B. Peyton has found a new job in State B, and has just begun working. Quinn has filed an action for child support in State A.

Is the State A court likely to have personal jurisdiction over Peyton?

A. Yes, because Quinn lives in State A.

B. No, because Peyton never lived with the child in State A.

C. Yes, because Peyton previously lived in State A and their child was conceived in State A.

D. No, because Peyton must be personally served in State A.

Answer 69

C. Yes, because Peyton previously lived in State A and their child was conceived in State A.

Correct. The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) lists 8 bases for personal jurisdiction, including “the individual resided in this State and provided prenatal expenses or support for the child” or “the individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this State and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse.” UIFSA § 201(a)(4),(6). Either of those might provide a basis for State A to issue an order.

Question 70

Nick and Aresu were married with two children. When they divorced, the family court in the State of Pennington awarded Nick primary custody and ordered Aresu to pay child support. Nick and the two children moved to the State of Stanton 6 months ago. Aresu’s employer has just gone out of business, and Aresu is now unemployed. Aresu has consulted a lawyer about whether a motion to modify the court’s child support order can be brought in the State of Pennington.

A. Pennington has jurisdiction because Aresu continues to live there.

B. Pennington has jurisdiction because there is significant information about the children there.

C. Pennington does not have jurisdiction because the children no longer live there.

D. Pennington does not have jurisdiction because the children and the primary custodian no longer live there.

Answer 70

A. Pennington has jurisdiction because Aresu continues to live there.

Correct. Pennington, as the state issuing the child support order, retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction so long as it remains the residence of the obligor, the obligee, or the children and the parties have not agreed that Stanton may assume modification jurisdiction. Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) § 205.

Question 71

Akira and Bailey lived in State P, and their twins, now age 10, were born there. After Akira and Bailey stopped living together, State P awarded Akira custody of the two children, and required Bailey to pay child support. A year later, Akira and the two children moved to State S. Bailey also moved at the same time, but to State C. Bailey also started a new job that doubled the previous salary that Bailey had been receiving in State P. Akira recently consulted a lawyer to determine where to bring an action for modification.

What advice should the lawyer give?

A. State P will have jurisdiction, as it was the state that issued the original order.

B. State P will have jurisdiction, as that is where the children were conceived.

C. State P will have jurisdiction, so long as Akira and Bailey consent in writing to Pennington’s jurisdiction.

D. State P will have jurisdiction because it is the children’s home state.

Answer 71

C. State P will have jurisdiction, so long as Akira and Bailey consent in writing to Pennington’s jurisdiction.

Correct. Under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), State P loses jurisdiction to modify its own order once all of the parties and the children leave the state. But State P can continue to assert jurisdiction if Akira and Bailey consent in writing to State P retaining modification jurisdiction. UIFSA § 205(a)(2).

Question 72

Ana and Fernando were married in State X. When they decided to divorce, Ana moved to State Y. She consulted a lawyer because she wanted to file for divorce as soon as possible. State Y requires that a person reside in the state for nine months before filing for divorce. Ana wishes to challenge the durational residency requirement as unconstitutional.

What advice should the lawyer give her about her chances for success?

A. She will fail. A durational residency requirement of this length is not a substantial impairment on her right to travel.

B. She will fail. A durational residency requirement of this length is not a substantial impairment of her right to get a divorce.

C. She will succeed. A durational residency requirement of this length for a divorce is a substantial impairment of her right to marry.

D. She will succeed. A durational residency requirement of this length furthers no legitimate state interest.

Answer 72

A. She will fail. A durational residency requirement of this length is not a substantial impairment on her right to travel.

Correct. The Supreme Court has held that a short durational residency requirement like this is related to the state’s interest in making certain a couple has a sufficient relationship to the state before granting divorces. In Sosna v. Iowa, 419 U.S. 393 (1974), the Supreme Court upheld a one-year durational residency requirement.

Question 73

Camden and Finley were married in State J. When they decided to divorce, Finley moved to State Z. Finley consulted a lawyer 6 months after the move to discuss divorce options. Finley would like to resolve issues involved in the divorce—obtaining the divorce decree, resolving property distribution, and establishing alimony rights—in one action.

What advice should the lawyer give Finley about whether this is possible?

A. Finley can secure a divorce decree in State Z even if State Z does not obtain personal jurisdiction over Camden.

B. Finley can obtain the divorce decree and a resolution of the alimony claims in State Z even if State Z does not obtain personal jurisdiction over Camden.

C. Finley can obtain relief on all three claims in State Z.

D. Finley can only obtain relief on any of the three claims in State J because State J has personal jurisdiction over both.

Answer 73

A. Finley can secure a divorce decree in State Z even if State Z does not obtain personal jurisdiction over Camden.

Correct. Under the doctrine of divisible divorce, a state can issue a divorce decree without personal jurisdiction over both parties, provided that one spouse is domiciled in the state but cannot resolve property-related issues unless it has jurisdiction over the absent spouse. Williams v. North Carolina (Williams I), 317 U.S. 287 (1942).

Question 74

Adele and Murphy were married in State X. When they decided to divorce, Adele moved to neighboring State Y, where she filed for and ultimately secured a divorce decree. Adele then moved back to State X, and immediately married Parker. Six months after Adele’s remarriage, Murphy claims that the State Y divorce decree is invalid, and brings an action in State X to determine whether Adele has committed bigamy.

A. State X cannot reexamine the State Y divorce decree because State Y’s decree is entitled to full faith and credit in State X.

B. State X can reexamine the State Y divorce decree because the State Y divorce decree is void, as State Y never obtained personal jurisdiction over Murphy.

C. State X cannot reexamine the State Y divorce decree because Adele lived in State Y for six months.

D. State X can reexamine the State Y divorce decree to determine the validity of the jurisdictional facts upon which the State Y decree was based.

Answer 74

D. State X can reexamine the State Y divorce decree to determine the validity of the jurisdictional facts upon which the State Y decree was based.

Correct. State Y could grant an ex parte divorce if at least one of the spouses was legally domiciled there. Williams v. North Carolina (Williams I), 317 U.S. 287 (1942). But State X can reexamine the question of domicile. Williams v. North Carolina (Williams II), 325 U.S. 226 (1945).

Question 75

Which of the following is not a reason a party might seek divorce on fault grounds even though no-fault grounds are available?

A. Fault grounds would ensure that the innocent party would receive custody of children;

B. Fault grounds might expedite the timing of the divorce;

C. Fault grounds might improve one party’s standing with respect to spousal maintenance;

D. Fault may vindicate a non-legal interest in adjudicating marital misconduct.

Answer 75

A. Fault grounds would ensure that the innocent party would receive custody of children

Correct. This would not be a reason to pursue fault-based divorce. Fault alone does not determine child custody and becomes relevant only where it can be shown to have the potential for negative impact on the child.