Wolfe v. Wolfe – Annulment of Marriage Based on Fraud
Wolfe v. Wolfe, 76 Ill. 92, 389 N.E.2d 1143 (Ill. 1979).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This case involved a suit for divorce and an annulment based on fraud.
FACTS: Mr. and Ms. Wolfe discussed marriage and W informed H that she previously had been married and divorced. H was a Roman Catholic and was prohibited from marrying a divorced woman whose husband was still alive. W later lied to H and told him that her former husband was killed in a car accident and showed him a forged death certificate. If W’s former husband were dead then she would be a widow in the eyes of the Catholic Church, thereby making it possible for H to marry her.
Mr. and Ms. Wolfe became married and W converted to Catholicism. The Wolfes had one child together. The Wolfes separated several years later and W filed for divorce. H filed a counterclaim seeking an annulment for fraud, based on W’s false claim that her former husband was dead.
At trial W’s former husband testified and W admitted to fraud. She plead the Fifth Amendment when questioned about the forged death certificate. H testified that he would not have married W if he believed that her former husband was still alive. The trial court ruled for H and later vacated that judgment. The court of appeals reversed and this appeal resulted.
ISSUE: Under what circumstances can a marriage contract be voided for fraud?
RULE OF LAW: A marriage contract can be voided for fraud only if the fraud itself affects the essentials of the marriage.
HOLDING AND DECISION: The evidence shows that W perpetrated a fraud upon H. The trial court ruled against H on the basis that the fraud must go to the marriage relation such that it would make the performance of duties and obligations of that relation impossible, or render its assumption and continuance dangerous to health or life. H has established that he is a loyal practitioner of Catholicism and his religion prohibits marriage with a divorced person whose former spouse is still living. We are convinced this marriage would not have occurred but for the fraud of W. Since discovering the fraud, H has been unable to continue marital cohabitation with W. This conduct is not a mere subjective personal aversion but something that his religion has commanded H to do. Under these facts, this fraud goes to the essentials of this marriage.
DISPOSITION: Annulment granted.