Annulment possible??

[cfroueche]

I have been married to my husband for 2 1/2 years. Due to health issues (his) the marriage has never been consummated and he refuses to take prescription drugs to assist. I am now ready to file but am wondering if it's possible to annul the marriage on these grounds alone in California and how difficult it is to get an annulment. I would prefer an annulment as I discovered that he has never filed an income tax return and I do not want to be held liable, as the major breadwinner, for any of his financial obligations.

 

[dee_dub]

Incurable physical incapacity is grounds for annulment in California. If it is curable, but he refuses to take the cure, I guess that's an open question. I think you would have a good shot.

Getting an annulment is almost universally more difficult than getting a divorce. In your case you'll need to adduce medical evidence, at least. Unless there are very good reasons to prefer an annulment it's simpler, cheaper and quicker to just get divorced.

I would note that, if you do go for an annulment, you must do so within 4 years of the date of the marriage. On the other hand, of course, you can file for divorce at any time.

 

[cfroueche]

Thanks, Dee_Dub, appreciate the advice. Think I'll just file the divorce papers and get on with it. Sounds like the annulment would be sure to cost me a lot of money in attorney fees at the very least and a whole of hassle in trying to get the appropriate medical records. I was worried about being financially responsible for his past income tax as well as he has threatened to sue for spousal support. Thanks again.

 

[dee_dub]

You're welcome. Good luck to you.

 

[jharris352]

He can also hold you harmless for his potential tax burden. Get that written into your divorce decree and settlement agreement.

 

[cfroueche]

Okay, so I decided to just go for the divorce and have filed. He has responded, asking the judge that he be allowed to stay in the marital home (a rental) "until such time as he can afford to relocate"; he did not request spousal support. Rather open-ended, in my opinion. I tried to negotiate with him when I was served his response, suggesting that we come to an agreement on how long he needed to remain in the home but he would have nothing to do with it. Hence, I decided it would be in my best interest to give my landlord 30 day notice that I was moving and started packing my things. Now he is quite angry because he cannot afford to pay the rent (I was paying all household bills) and has decided to amend his response and request spousal support. He is on SS disability but is capable of working. I have photographs of him doing hard physical labor (ie digging trenches, rototilling, auto body work). In addition, in his response he claimed that "both parties have contributed financially to the marital home". I can prove with financial records that this is not true. How much does anyone think that proof of his "fraud" and lie to the court will influence the court and will his credibility be considered when deciding to award spousal support?

 

[cfroueche]

Oops...I double posted and though the edit button says edit or delete I can't figure out how to delete. Sorry

 

[jharris352]

He isn't going to get spousal support after a 2.5 year marriage where he is at fault for the divorce. Now I don't know if you filed a fault divorce but I would have. You were absolutely right to not allow such an open ended arrangement, but in my opinion, neither would the judge. The judge would have given him 60-90 days tops to move or take over the lease. You are getting a divorce, you don't owe him support.

Good luck, it sounds like you are a pretty sharp lady.

 

[cfroueche]

Thanks for the response. It makes me feel a little more comfortable about the situation. Regardless, I'll go to court and take my licks as required by the judge if he/she so sees fit. Even spousal support would be a far cry cheaper than continuing to support him indefinitely.