## Facts

- Kathleen T. Holston filed a divorce action in the Lee Circuit Court (2008), alleging she and John Lewis Reese had formed a common-law marriage and seeking an award of real property treated as marital.
- The disputed house had belonged to Holston, went into foreclosure, and was purchased by Reese from Holston in 1999; Holston continued living there after the sale.
- Holston asserted Reese proposed on December 23, 1999, and that the couple announced they were married to her family the next day; relatives testified to that announcement.
- Holston claimed they cohabited as husband and wife at Reese’s home and later moved together into the disputed property (2001); she characterized her monthly payments to Reese as repayment for the purchase.
- Holston offered two funeral programs prepared by her family listing her as “Kathleen Reese,” and testified church members believed she was married to Reese based on what she and her family said.
- Reese denied any proposal or agreement to marry, testified he dated other women during the period in question, and described the relationship as landlord-tenant with occasional intimacy.
- Reese asserted Holston’s payments were rent and that living arrangements were nonmarital (including separate sleeping arrangements); he filed eviction proceedings in 2004 for nonpayment.

## Issues

1. Whether Holston proved, by clear and convincing evidence, a valid Alabama common-law marriage (including present mutual agreement and public recognition), supporting a divorce judgment and a marital-property award.

## Decision

- The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment finding a common-law marriage, granting a divorce, and awarding the disputed real property to Holston.
- The court held Holston did not establish a common-law marriage by clear and convincing evidence, particularly as to a present mutual agreement to marry and public recognition.
- The case was remanded for entry of a judgment consistent with the appellate opinion.

## Legal Principles

- A valid Alabama common-law marriage (as recognized at the time) required: (1) capacity; (2) present mutual agreement to enter a permanent, exclusive marital relationship; (3) public recognition of the marriage; and (4) cohabitation/mutual assumption of marital duties.
- The proponent of a common-law marriage must prove each element by clear and convincing evidence, and such claims are closely scrutinized.
- Cohabitation alone does not establish a common-law marriage; it must be accompanied by a present mutual marital agreement and genuine public recognition.
- A divorce judgment and marital-property division require a valid marriage; failure to prove a marriage defeats divorce and related property awards premised on marital status.

## Conclusion

The appellate court set aside the divorce and property award because the evidence did not clearly and convincingly show a present mutual agreement to marry or sufficient public recognition of a marital relationship, making the trial court’s common-law-marriage finding unsustainable.


Reese v. Holston, 67 So. 3d 109 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011)