## Facts

- Sidney F. Larson and Myrtle Larson married on March 21, 1950, in Sycamore, Illinois.
- About two years later, Myrtle was committed to Elgin State Hospital as mentally ill.
- Sidney filed an equitable action seeking annulment, alleging Myrtle was of unsound mind at the time of the marriage and could not understand the marriage contract or its duties and obligations.
- Sidney relied in part on Illinois statutory language then stating that an “insane person or idiot” could not contract marriage.
- At trial, Sidney presented lay testimony describing Myrtle’s conduct and personality and expert psychiatric opinion based on hypothetical questions; the expert did not examine Myrtle at or near the time of the marriage.
- The record contained no direct medical diagnosis of Myrtle’s mental condition as of the wedding date and no strong evidence of abnormal behavior at or immediately surrounding the ceremony.
- The circuit court dismissed the complaint for want of equity, and Sidney appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Sidney proved by clear and convincing evidence that Myrtle, at the time of the 1950 marriage, lacked sufficient capacity to understand the nature of the marriage contract and the duties and obligations incident to it, warranting annulment.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the decree dismissing the annulment complaint.
- The court held Sidney did not carry the burden to overcome the strong presumption that a solemnized marriage is valid.
- Evidence of Myrtle’s later institutionalization did not establish incapacity at the time of marriage.
- Expert testimony based solely on hypotheticals and without contemporaneous examination was given limited weight and did not supply the required proof of incapacity at the ceremony.

## Legal Principles

- A proven marriage is strongly presumed valid; the party seeking annulment bears the burden of proof.
- To annul a marriage for mental incapacity, the challenger must show the spouse lacked sufficient mind and reason to understand the nature of the marriage contract and the duties and obligations arising from it.
- Because annulment disturbs an existing marital status, incapacity must be established by clear and convincing (clear and satisfactory) evidence.
- The relevant time for assessing capacity is the moment the marriage contract is entered; later mental illness or commitment is not, by itself, proof of incapacity at marriage.
- Retrospective expert opinions based on hypothetical questions, without personal examination or contemporaneous observation, may be insufficient to meet the clear-and-convincing standard.

## Conclusion

The court refused to annul the marriage because the husband’s proof did not clearly and convincingly show that the wife lacked the mental capacity to understand marriage at the time of the wedding, and later commitment plus retrospective opinion evidence did not overcome the presumption of validity.


Larson v. Larson, 42 Ill. App. 2d 467, 192 N.E.2d 594 (Ill. App. Ct. 1963)