Much Ado About 'I Do': Viability Of Common Law Marriage and Its Effect on Work C

Saturday, September 8, 2007 | 0

By Mark S. Royster

The Commonwealth Court recently examined, yet again, the viability of common law marriages, an issue which has caused a flurry of judicial and legislative activity in recent years. Interestingly, matrimonial law plays a significant role in workers' compensation, particularly in the area of awarding benefits for a fatal claim. It is in this context that the Commonwealth Court stormed back into the center of this controversial issue in an attempt to clarify the law regarding the existence and validity of common law marriages in Pennsylvania. However, as discussed below, the court in Costello v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Kinsley Construction, Inc.) (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007), has likely provided us with an answer that may only be temporary.

The Facts

The claimant's putative husband ("decedent") died June 28, 2004, from a crush injury he sustained in the course of his employment with the defendant-employer, Kinsley Construction Inc. The claimant, Lori Newhart Costello, timely filed a fatal claim petition alleging that she was the decedent's widow by common law marriage. Ms. Costello alleged a date of marriage of Nov. 26, 2003 and presented evidence that she and the decedent entered into a notarized confirmation of common law marriage indicating an intent to have a marital relationship. In 2002, the claimant and the decedent had a son, Tanner Joseph Costello, whom the claimant claimed, along with herself, as the decedent's dependents in her petition for benefits. The employer responded by asserting that common law marriage no longer exists in Pennsylvania.

At trial, the claimant testified that she and the decedent met in 1997 and began living together in 1998. They resided in a house with a mortgage in the claimant's name only, but the decedent paid the monthly expenses. In 1998, the decedent asked the claimant to marry him and gave her a ring. Because they did not have insurance, they shared the cost of Tanner's birth and subsequent medical treatment. The claimant had a credit card in her name, although the decedent maintained one in his name as well. Together, they had a joint checking account and a joint cell phone account. Both of their cars were titled in the name of the decedent's parents, who carried the insurance on the vehicles. The decedent's obituary referred to him as the claimant's husband and explained that they were married on Nov. 27, 2003.

On Nov. 26, 2003, the claimant and the decedent notarized a document entitled "Confirmation of Common Law Marriage," which confirmed their intent to comply with Pennsylvania law creating a common law marriage. After execution of the document, the claimant began using "Costello" as her and her son's last name, and the couple filed their 2003 tax return as "married filing jointly." In November 2003, the claimant became covered by the decedent's life insurance through his employer; his Nov. 17, 2003, application form listed Lori L. Newhart as "fianc