It is clear that Michigan only recognizes marriages that follow the proper legal formalities.  Michigan does not give any legal recognition to a religious marriage.  A relationship that does not meet the statutory requirements for a legal marriage does not give rise to property rights, personal rights, or rights to support. Michigan law provides:

So far as its validity in law is concerned, marriage is a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of parties capable in law of contracting is essential. Consent alone is not enough to effectuate a legal marriage. Consent shall be followed by obtaining a license as required by law, and solemnization as authorized by law.

To obtain a valid marriage under Michigan law, it shall be necessary for all parties intending to be married to obtain a marriage license from the county clerk of the county in which either the man or woman resides and to deliver the said license to the clergyman or magistrate who is to officiate, before the marriage can be performed. If both parties to be married are non-residents of the state it shall be necessary to obtain such license from the county clerk of the county in which the marriage is to be performed.

In a divorce case several years ago, plaintiff Wife and defendant Husband entered into an Islamic marriage. The Islamic marriage certificate provided that Wife would receive $15,000 if the parties divorced. Later, in March 1996, they were married in a civil ceremony. The parties lived in a house that Husband owned before the marriage and had one son.

Wife filed for a civil divorce in January 2002. She attributed the breakdown of the marriage to Husband’s arrest for allegedly using the internet to commit a crime where the intended victim was believed to be a minor and to instances of domestic violence. The parties obtained an Islamic divorce in February 2002. At that time, Wife signed a divorce contract acknowledging the receipt of $15,000 and providing for joint custody of the parties’ son.

The parties had few marital assets and $75,000 in marital debt. Following a bench trial, the trial court awarded Wife the marital home to live in, along with the $37,600 marital equity in the home. The court awarded Husband a $59,400 lien on the home, to be held as security for spousal support and child support payments. Wife was ordered to repay the lien when she remarried, sold the house, or when the parties’ child either graduated from high school or reached the age of eighteen, whichever event came first. The trial court awarded the parties’ $75,000 debt, in a home-equity line of credit, solely to Husband. Wife was awarded sole physical custody of the parties’ child, and the parties were awarded joint legal custody. Husband was ordered to pay child support, and $200 per week in modifiable spousal support for five years.

Husband appealed the property and custody rulings of the trial court, arguing that the trial court erred in its property division, because it denied recognition of the parties’ Islamic marriage and divorce contracts. Husband contended that the marriage contract should be recognized as a prenuptial agreement limiting Wife to a $15,000 property settlement and that the divorce contract should be recognized as affirming the property distribution portion of the marriage contract, and as awarding the parties joint custody of their son.

In denying Husband’s appeal, the Court of Appeals relied on an earlier case that considered whether to enforce an Orthodox Jewish marriage contract. In Deal v. Deal, the Court held that because plaintiff failed to request specific performance of an Orthodox Jewish marriage contract and did not introduce the contract into evidence, plaintiff did not preserve the issue of its enforcement for appeal.

The courts in both cases left open the possibility that, had the defendant in either case submitted the religious marriage contract into evidence at the appropriate time, the court could have been compelled to honor the agreements of the parties.  Thus, couples wishing to have the terms of their religious contract of marriage honored by civil courts are wise to consult with an attorney beforehand.  In the unfortunate event of divorce, the parties should alert their counsel of the existence of the religious marriage contract at the earliest opportunity, so that it can be properly introduced into evidence. 

— Kassem Dakhlallah is a partner with Jaafar & Mahdi Law Group, P.C.  His practice focuses on complex litigation, including class actions, representative actions, commercial litigation, civil forfeiture and personal injury. He can be reached at (313) 846-6400 and kassem@jaafarandmahdi.com.