Mark and Cindy Jo Holt were first married in 1984, and then divorced four years later. Fifteen years after their divorce, they became romantically involved once again. While they were dating, Mark Holt was diagnosed with lung cancer; the couple was remarried on October 29, 2005. That evening Mark Holt suffered a seizure, and less than three weeks later he died.

Mark Holt’s brother Richard challenged the marriage in probate court. If the couple had legally wed, Cindy Jo Holt would be Mark’s surviving spouse and sole heir; if the marriage was invalid, Richard Holt would inherit. He argued that his brother probably had been suffering seizures throughout the wedding day, and that his mental capacity would have been significantly diminished. Furthermore, insisted Richard Holt, his brother was taking narcotic drugs as part of his cancer treatment, and that would have further affected his ability to get married.

After a hearing, the Indiana Probate Court ruled that Richard Holt had not carried his burden of showing that the marriage was invalid. It is true, agreed the probate judge, that marriage is a contract, and that both parties must be competent to understand the nature of the marriage and its effect. Nonetheless, the mere fact that Mark Holt was terminally ill and on medication was not enough to invalidate his marriage.

Richard Holt appealed the ruling to the Indiana Court of Appeals. He argued that the probate judge had made a number of mistakes that justified reversal of the judgment. In the first place, said Richard Holt, the probate judge erred by allowing testimony from non-experts who were mostly Cindy Jo Holt’s friends, and whose testimony should therefore have been treated as suspect.

The appellate court disagreed, and upheld the probate court ruling. The burden of showing that a marriage contract is invalid rests on the person challenging the marriage, said the appellate judges, and the challenge can not be based solely on speculation and supposition. Without actual evidence of Mark Holt’s incapacity at the time of the wedding ceremony, Richard Holt’s objections were properly denied.

Although none of the individuals present at the wedding were experts in determining mental capacity, there is no prohibition against laypeople testifying about their impressions. The court clerk who issued the license and others in the wedding party all testified that Mark Holt conversed and even joked with them, that he understood what was going on, and that he specifically affirmed that he wanted to get married. The fact that Sally Jo Holt had been married a total of four times was irrelevant—as was the very fact of Mark Holt’s terminal illness. Estate of Holt, July 23, 2007.

Would you like to subscribe to Elder Law Issues? Simply provide your e-mail address and name below, and click "Subscribe". At the same time, you may choose to also subscribe to The Voice, the newsletter of the Special Needs Alliance.

Privacy note: We do not ever use your e-mail address or name for any purpose other than to send out our subscription-based newsletter. You can rest assured that we will not sell, trade or share this information with any other person or entity. We have no ancillary or associated companies or entities to which we could provide your e-mail address, either.

© 1993-2008 Fleming & Curti, P.L.C.
520-622-0400 /  FAX: 520-203-0240