This memorandum is in response to your request for our legal opinion as to whether
the 1945 proxy marriage between Wendell C. T~, the now-deceased wage-earner (DWE),
and Adyline L. C~ T~ would be considered valid. The information accompanying your
request indicates that the parties, by and through their respective proxies, obtained
in Oklahoma marriage license, and delivered a duplicate contract of marriage in the
presence of witnesses and before Honorable James P. M~, Judge of the County Court
of Tulsa County, Oklahoma on March 9, 1945. Neither Wendell nor Adyline was present
in Oklahoma at the time the marriage was solemnized; instead each was represented
by a proxy because Adyline resided in Iowa, and Wendell, a U.S. Army Officer, was
stationed in Europe. For reasons that will be discussed more fully below, we conclude
that under the relevant law, this marriage would be considered valid.
Although proxy marriage is considered to be unusual in contemporary American society,
it is not unknown. Proxy marriage has been defined as an attempt to comply with the
statutory formalities of marriage. The single distinguishing feature is that one or
both of the parties is absent and is represented by an agent or proxy who has the
authority to act on behalf of his/her principle in the marriage ceremony. 52 Am Jur.
2d MARRIAGE 13. During times of war, as was the case here, this type of marriage proved
useful to men who were away in the service when they could not contract a valid marriage
in any other way. Note, The Validity of Absentee Marriages of Servicemen, 55 YALE L.J. 735 (1946). Indeed, during World War II Minnesota enacted a statute
expressly authorizing proxy marriages upon proof that the woman was pregnant. MINN.
STAT. ANN. sec. 517.09. Although proxy marriages are still only recognized by many churches, the Roman Catholic Church, in Canons 1089 and 1091, expressly provides for solemnization of marriage by proxy where the proxy is authorized by the absentee.
Whether such a marriage will be considered valid in American law, however, depends
upon whether the state where one of the parties resides permits such marriages to
be performed within its jurisdiction or, if not, whether the resident state will recognize
such a marriage if performed in a jurisdiction where it is allowed, even if not permissible
in the resident state. Therefore, the threshold question in this case is whether Iowa,
the resident state of Adyline at the time of the proxy marriage, would either permit
proxy marriage or recognize such a marriage performed elsewhere.
We found no Iowa cases which discuss the legality of proxy or absentee marriage in
that jurisdiction. Indeed, there is remarkably little case authority on the validity
of proxy marriages contracted anywhere in the United States. Several law review articles
have been written on the subject, however. With respect to Iowa, one commentator wrote
that the validity of proxy marriage had not been tested in Iowa, but found it significant
that nothing in the Iowa statues [of that time or earlier] would militate against
proxy marriage by requiring the presence of the marriage partners at the ceremony.
1 DRAKE L.REV. 43, 44 (1952). Another commentator noted that nine states honor proxy
marriages formed within their borders: Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Nevada, and New Mexico. M~, Case for Marriage by Proxy, 11 CLEVELAND-MARSHALL L.REV.313, 318 ( ).
It is also noteworthy that no state has failed to recognized a proxy marriage contracted
in a jurisdiction which permits this form of marriage. See e.g. Barrons v. United States, 191 F.2d 92 (9th Cir. 1951) (all states which have passed on the question have recognized
the validity of proxy marriages validly performed elsewhere). But see: Respole v. Respole, 70 N.E.2d 465 (Ohio Com. Pl. 1946) in which the court held the proxy marriage invalid
because it was never consummated. One commentator wrote that "probably the greatest
single factor compelling the use of proxy marriage is that of legitimizing children."
25 S. CAL. L. REV. 181 (1951).
Consequently in light of these interpretations of Iowa law by legal writers of the
period, it is reasonable to assume that it may have been possible to contract a proxy
marriage in Iowa. If that is so, then it follows that Iowa clearly would recognize
a proxy marriage validly performed elsewhere. Since the marriage in question was performed
in Oklahoma, it is necessary to examine Oklahoma law to determine whether there was
any obstacle to solemnization of a proxy marriage in that state.
Proxy marriages were contracted frequently in Oklahoma during World War II although
the statutes of the state did not specifically provide for such marriage. H~, Marriage By Proxy and Other Informal
Marriages, 13 U. KAN. CITY L. REV. 48 (1944). In that article, the commentator noted that the
National Association of Legal Aid Committees named Oklahoma as the only state in the
nation where a marriage could be legally performed without either the bride or groom
being present. Id. at p. 92. According to H~, there were no apparent objections of a practical nature
which would militate against statutory marriages by proxy in Oklahoma, because "such
marriages have taken place with more frequency in this state than in any other jurisdiction,
with the possible exception of the state of Kansas". Id.
As H~ correctly observed, marriage in Oklahoma is based upon a contract, the two parties
being married from the time they agree to be married regardless of whether or not
they ever live together. Id. See also: Tice v. Tice, 672 P.2d 1168, 1171 (Okla. 1983).
Under Oklahoma law, marriage is defined as:
[A] personal relation arising out of a civil contract to which the consent of parties
legally competent of contracting and of entering into it is necessary, and the marriage
relation shall only be entered into, maintained, or abrogated as provided by law.
OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 43, §1.
At the time of the marriage in question, Oklahoma permitted a marriage license to
issue on the affidavit of any responsible person with knowledge of the parties. OKLA.
STAT. ANN. tit. 43, §5 (1945). There was no statutory requirement of the parties'
presence; and prior to 1945, no health certificate was required. OKLA. STAT. ANN.
tit. 43, §31 et seq. Although a health certificate was necessary after 1945, the requirement
could be waived by a judge of a County Court under certain circumstances. OKLA. STAT.
ANN. tit. 43, §32. (1945).
The application for marriage license signed by Norma W~, who was proxy and attorney-in-fact
for Adyline, is in the material you sent for our review. On its face it appears to
meet the requisites of Oklahoma law. The marriage license, also in the file, authorized
the marriage of Wendell C. T~ and Adyline L.C~. Finally, as discussed previously,
the Certificate of Marriage, which is signed by James P. M~, Judge of the County Court
of Tulsa, and which bears the official State seal, attests that Wendell, by James
B. D~s, Jr., his proxy and attorney-in-fact, and Adyline, by Norma M~, her proxy and
attorney-in-fact, executed, acknowledged, and delivered a written contract
of marriage, in his presence. In our view, this attestation of the judge is the same as a judgment
which is valid on its face, and which could have been collaterally attacked only in
the manner provided by law. Fowler v. Goldfeder, 418 P.2d 317 (Okla. 1966). Hence, it appears that the proxy marriage met the statutory
requisites of Oklahoma in 1945.
It is important to note, however that even if the marriage did not meet the statutory
requisites, it would be considered only voidable, not void. _/1 See e.g., Respole
v. Respole, supra. In that case, the husband brought suit against the wife to annul a marriage
performed in West Virginia in 1943 while the husband was in India. The court held
the marriage invalid because the wife would not live with the husband upon his return
to the United States; in face the marriage was never consummated. The court said that
then result would have been different if the marriage had been consummated since then
it would have been recognized as a common law marriage in Ohio, the residence of the
In a New York case, Ferraro v. Ferraro, 77 N.Y.S. 2d 246 (1948), the court held valid a proxy marriage, solemnized in Washington,
D.C. In that case, as in the case under review here, the statutes were silent regarding
proxy marriage. The court reasoned that since the license was validly obtained and
a ceremonial marriage is presumed to be valid, unless the presumption is overcome,
the Ferraro marriage would be considered valid under the law of the place of celebration and
therefore valid elsewhere.
In our view the same rationale should be applied to the T~ marriage. As earlier discussed,
the license appears to have been legally obtained, the contract was duly entered into
by and through authorized agents, and the marriage was certified by a judge. As in
most jurisdictions, Oklahoma law presumes that a ceremonial marriage is valid. Hale
v. Hale, 135 P. 1143 (Okla. 1913). This presumption is one of the strongest in law, and is
grounded in public policy favoring morality, marriage and legitimacy. The presumption
increases in strength with time, recognition, and acknowledgment of the marriage by
others, and with the birth of children. Marcum v. Zaring, 405 P.2d 970 (Okla. 1965)
Finally, it should be noted that both Iowa, the domicile of Wendell and Adyline at
the time the proxy marriage was celebrated, and Ohio, their domicile at the time of
his death, recognize common law marriage. Thus, in our opinion, even if, for some
procedural irregularity, the formal proxy marriage would not be considered valid,
it is clear that Wendell and Adyline would be considered married at common law since
the requisites of an informal common law marriage were met: they intended to be married,
they held themselves out as married, and they cohabitated as husband and wife for
In summary, because the T~ proxy marriage appears to comport with the 1945 statutory
requirements of Oklahoma, and because it offends no public policy of Iowa, the resident
state at the time of the marriage, or Ohio, the state in which the wage earner died
domiciled, we believed the marriage must be considered valid. Even if the formal proxy
marriage would not be upheld, however, it is our view that the couple would be considered
to have had an informal common law marriage of long standing. Therefore, in our opinion,
Adyline, L. C~ T~ is entitled to widow's benefits on Wendell's wage record.
/s/ Charlene M. S~
Assistant Regional Counsel
_/1 A voidable marriage, the imperfection of which can only be inquired into during
the lives of both of the parties, is valid for all civil purposes until annulled in
a direct proceeding. A void marriage is a nullity and may be impeached at any time.