Massachusetts
Common Law Marriage in Massachusetts: Is It Recognized? (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 18, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 18, 2026. · 2 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Massachusetts does not allow couples to form a new common law marriage within the state, and Massachusetts courts have said this is not a recent change. The Supreme Judicial Court stated in Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615, 617 (1994), that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage, a position the court repeated in Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326, 332 (1998). There is no primary source confirming a July 12, 1977 abolition date or a grandfathering rule for marriages formed in Massachusetts before that date. Massachusetts does recognize a common law marriage validly formed in another state that still permits such marriages.
Information last verified on June 2, 2026.
Does Massachusetts recognize common law marriage?
No. Massachusetts courts describe this as a matter of the Commonwealth never having recognized common law marriage at all, not as an abolition on a specific date. No couple can form a valid common law marriage within Massachusetts. Any Massachusetts relationship, no matter how long it has lasted, how publicly the parties held themselves out as married, or what mutual understanding they believed they had, does not create a legally recognized marriage in Massachusetts without a formal license and ceremony.
There is no confirmed abolition date and no grandfathering provision in Massachusetts law for an informal marriage formed within the state. Massachusetts case law, including Davis v. Misiano, 373 Mass. 261 (1977), and Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615 (1994), consistently describes the Commonwealth as never having recognized in-state common law marriage, at any point.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed this issue directly in Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326, 332 (1998), stating that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage. Wilcox was primarily a case about the enforceability of a written cohabitation agreement between an unmarried couple, not a ruling about a 1977 abolition date, and its statement on common law marriage matches what the court said in Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615, 617 (1994): cohabitation and mutual intent to be married, without formal solemnization, do not create a valid marriage under Massachusetts law.
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 207 governs marriage in the Commonwealth. The chapter establishes a comprehensive framework requiring notice of intention (section 20), a certificate issued by the town clerk (section 28), solemnization by an authorized person (section 38), and registration of the ceremony. This statutory scheme provides no pathway for informal marriage formation, consistent with Massachusetts courts' statements that the Commonwealth has never recognized common law marriage.
Is there a grandfathered common law marriage formed within Massachusetts?
No primary source confirms this. Massachusetts case law, including Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615 (1994), and Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326 (1998), describes the Commonwealth as never having recognized in-state common law marriage, without tying that position to any specific date. There is no known Massachusetts statute or published decision establishing a specific abolition date or a grandfathering rule for marriages formed within the state before a cutoff.
Anyone who believes they have an old informal marriage formed within Massachusetts should not rely on July 12, 1977, or any other specific date, as a legal cutoff, since no primary source establishes one. Consult a licensed Massachusetts family law attorney, who can research whether any exception applies to a specific set of facts.
Because Massachusetts case law does not establish any date or mechanism by which an in-state informal relationship became a legal marriage, a party asserting such a claim faces a difficult burden. Courts would look at contemporaneous documents, including tax returns, insurance designations, bank records, property titles, and correspondence, as well as testimony from witnesses, but the underlying legal theory that an in-state common law marriage was ever possible in Massachusetts is not supported by the case law reviewed for this article.
For practical purposes, a claim of a common law marriage formed within Massachusetts is very difficult to sustain given the case law described above. Anyone facing this question in an estate proceeding or survivor-benefit dispute should consult a licensed Massachusetts family law attorney.
Does Massachusetts recognize a common law marriage from another state?
Yes. Massachusetts gives full legal recognition to a common law marriage that was validly formed in a state that still permits such marriages. This recognition follows from the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution, which requires each state to give effect to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state, and from the doctrine of comity, under which courts recognize foreign legal relationships that were valid where created.
A couple who formed a valid informal marriage in Texas under , or in Colorado under C.R.S. section 14-2-109.5, and who later moved to Massachusetts, retains full marital status in Massachusetts. Massachusetts courts treat the couple as legally married for purposes of divorce, property division, spousal support, intestate inheritance, and all other legal incidents of marriage.
This rule applies to a couple who formed a valid common law marriage in another state, then moved to Massachusetts and later moved away and returned; the marriage remains valid throughout.
To obtain Massachusetts recognition of an out-of-state common law marriage, a party must establish that the marriage satisfied the requirements of the state where it was formed. Massachusetts courts will apply the law of that other state to evaluate whether the marriage was validly created, not Massachusetts law.
How to prove a common law marriage formed in another state
A common law marriage leaves no license or certificate, so the party asserting the marriage must produce other evidence. The categories of evidence that courts consider when evaluating a claimed out-of-state common law marriage in Massachusetts proceedings are similar across jurisdictions.
Evidence courts commonly consider includes:
- Joint federal and state tax returns filed as married filing jointly or married filing separately
- Joint bank accounts, joint mortgage or lease agreements, or jointly titled property
- Insurance policies listing the partner as a spouse or dependent
- Loan applications, employer benefit enrollment forms, or government records identifying the relationship as a marriage
- Testimony from family members, friends, coworkers, neighbors, or clergy who knew the couple as a married pair
- Written correspondence, social media profiles, or documents in which the parties refer to each other as husband, wife, or spouse
- Use of a shared surname
- Affidavits executed by both parties affirming the marriage
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 207, section 47, provides that marriage may be proved by evidence of general repute, cohabitation of the parties as married persons, or any other fact from which it may be inferred. That evidentiary provision applies to proving existing marriages, not to forming new ones.
No single piece of evidence is determinative. Courts weigh the whole picture to determine whether the parties genuinely agreed to be married and represented themselves as married, as required by the law of the state where the marriage was allegedly formed.
The 7-year cohabitation myth
A widespread misconception holds that living together for 7 years automatically creates a common law marriage. This is false in every state in the United States, including states that still allow common law marriage formation, and it is completely inapplicable in Massachusetts.
No state that permits common law marriage sets a minimum number of cohabitation years as a requirement. The relevant elements are the present mutual agreement of the parties to be married, cohabitation in the permitting state, and public representation of the marriage. Duration of cohabitation is relevant only as circumstantial evidence of intent, not as a standalone trigger.
In Massachusetts, no period of cohabitation creates a marriage, according to the Commonwealth's own case law. A couple that has lived together in Massachusetts for 7 years, or 27 years, without a license and ceremony is not legally married in Massachusetts, regardless of any mutual understanding or public representation.
How a common law marriage ends
A valid common law marriage, wherever it was formed, can only be terminated by a formal legal divorce, annulment, or the death of a spouse. There is no such thing as a common law divorce or an informal dissolution of a marriage. Moving apart, ending the relationship, or entering a new partnership does not end a valid marriage.
This rule has significant practical consequences. A person who formed a valid common law marriage in Colorado or Texas, moved to Massachusetts, and then separated without filing for divorce is still legally married under Massachusetts law. If that person later marries another partner in a Massachusetts ceremony, the second marriage is void because the prior valid marriage remains in force.
Massachusetts courts dissolve common law marriages formed in other states through the same divorce proceedings and under the same legal standards that govern the dissolution of any Massachusetts marriage. The court applies Massachusetts divorce law, including the alimony provisions under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 208 and the child support guidelines, to the dissolution.
For context on what that process may involve financially, see Massachusetts alimony laws and Massachusetts child support laws.
For a state-by-state comparison of which states recognize common law marriage, see Common law marriage by state.
Disclaimer: This page provides general legal information about common law marriage recognition in Massachusetts and is not legal advice. Marriage and family law determinations are fact-specific and depend on individual circumstances, including the law of the state where any claimed common law marriage was formed. This information was verified as of June 2, 2026. Consult a licensed Massachusetts family law attorney for advice about your specific situation.
Last updated: June 2, 2026.
More Massachusetts Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Massachusetts have common law marriage?
Massachusetts courts, including the Supreme Judicial Court in Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615, 617 (1994), and Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326, 332 (1998), have stated that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage. No primary source confirms a July 12, 1977 abolition date or a grandfathering rule for marriages formed within the state.
What is the Wilcox v. Trautz case about?
Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326, 332 (1998), is best known as a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision holding that written cohabitation agreements between unmarried couples are enforceable as ordinary contracts. In reaching that holding, the court restated that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage, and that cohabitation and mutual intent, without formal solemnization, do not create a valid marriage under Massachusetts law.
Will Massachusetts recognize my common law marriage from another state?
Yes. Massachusetts recognizes a common law marriage validly formed in a state that permits it, such as Colorado, Texas, Iowa, or Rhode Island, under the Full Faith and Credit Clause and comity principles. You must show the marriage satisfied the requirements of the state where it was formed.
Does living together for 7 years create a common law marriage in Massachusetts?
No. The 7-year rule is a myth with no basis in any state law. Massachusetts courts have said the Commonwealth has never recognized common law marriage, so no cohabitation period creates a marriage in Massachusetts. Even in states that still allow common law marriage, no minimum number of years is required.
I had a relationship in Massachusetts that started in the 1970s. Could it be a valid common law marriage?
Massachusetts case law, including Collins v. Guggenheim, 417 Mass. 615 (1994), and Wilcox v. Trautz, 427 Mass. 326 (1998), states that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage formed within the state, at any point. There is no confirmed date before which such a relationship would have been valid. Consult a licensed Massachusetts family law attorney to evaluate your specific facts, including whether the relationship might instead have involved a valid marriage formed in another state.
Do I need a divorce to end a common law marriage?
Yes, if the common law marriage was validly formed in another state that permits common law marriage. A legal marriage, whether ceremonial or common law, can only be dissolved by formal divorce, annulment, or death. Informally separating does not end the marriage, and attempting to remarry without a divorce can render the second marriage void.
What legal rights does a common law spouse have in Massachusetts?
If a common law marriage is recognized in Massachusetts as a valid out-of-state common law marriage, the spouse has the same rights as any other legally married spouse in Massachusetts. These include rights in divorce proceedings (property division, alimony), intestate inheritance rights, spousal elective share, and the right to bring wrongful death or loss of consortium claims.
Updates
Rewrote the meta description, which incorrectly stated that Massachusetts abolished common law marriage in 1977 and that pre-1977 in-state unions remain valid, to match the article's own sourced position: Massachusetts courts say the Commonwealth has never recognized common law marriage formed in-state, and no primary source confirms a 1977 abolition date. Also removed a miscited case, Robbins v. Robbins (1886), which is an adultery/divorce case with no bearing on common law marriage, from four places on the page (intro, two body sections, and the FAQ); the page's conclusion remains fully supported by Collins v. Guggenheim (1994) and Wilcox v. Trautz (1998), both independently verified to hold that Massachusetts has never recognized common law marriage.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Removed the fabricated July 12, 1977 common-law-marriage abolition date and grandfathering narrative. Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case law (Collins v. Guggenheim, 1994; Wilcox v. Trautz, 1998, tracing back to Robbins v. Robbins, 1886) states the Commonwealth has never recognized common law marriage; Wilcox v. Trautz is actually about the enforceability of cohabitation contracts and does not mention 1977.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Texas Family Code
§ 2.401PROOF OF INFORMAL MARRIAGEIn forcecited in 22 of our articles
(a) In a judicial, administrative, or other proceeding, the marriage of a man and woman may be proved by evidence that: (1) a declaration of their marriage has been signed as provided by this subchapter; or (2) the man and woman agreed to be married and after the agreement they lived together in this state as husband and wife and there represented to others that they were married. (b) If a proceeding in which a marriage is to be proved as provided by Subsection (a)(2) is not commenced before the second anniversary of the date on which the parties separated and ceased living together, it is rebuttably presumed that the parties did not enter into an agreement to be married. (c) A person under 18 years of age may not: (1) be a party to an informal marriage; or (2) execute a declaration of informal marriage under Section 2.402. (d) A person may not be a party to an informal marriage or execute a declaration of an informal marriage if the person is presently married to a person who is not the other party to the informal marriage or declaration of an informal marriage, as applicable.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at statutes.capitol.texas.gov
Cited in 98 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Joplin v. Borusheski (2008) applied section 2.401(b): a suit filed over two years after separation raises a rebuttable presumption the parties never agreed to marry, which that proponent did not rebut. In Lan Ngoc Nguyen v. Dinh Duc Nguyen (2011) the 2.401(d) prior-marriage impediment was not proved, and that finding was reversed.
Leading cases:
- Lan Ngoc Nguyen v. Dinh Duc Nguyen (Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) 2011, 355 S.W.3d 82)✓A husband fought his wife's divorce petition by claiming an earlier Vietnamese marriage was an impediment under Section 2.401(d); the court found the proof of that prior marriage factually insufficient and remanded to decide the statute's three informal-marriage elements.
- Assoun v. Gustafson (Court of Appeals of Texas 2016, 493 S.W.3d 156)✓An ex-husband sued to have his former wife declared informally married to her boyfriend, ending his alimony; applying Section 2.401(a), the court affirmed summary judgment for the couple because their sworn denials of any agreement to marry defeated his circumstantial proof.
- Joplin v. Borusheski (Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) 2008, 244 S.W.3d 607)✓A man filed for divorce in 2005 claiming a common-law marriage, more than two years after the couple stopped living together; the court applied Section 2.401(b)'s rebuttable presumption of no agreement to marry and held his testimony failed to rebut it.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Common Law Marriage by State: Where It's Recognized (2026), Common Law Marriage in Arizona: Is It Recognized? (2026), Common Law Marriage in Arkansas: Is It Recognized? (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- M.G.L. Chapter 207, Marriage(malegislature.gov)
- M.G.L. Chapter 207, section 38(malegislature.gov)
- M.G.L. Chapter 207, section 47(malegislature.gov)
- U.S. Constitution Art. IV sec. 1(law.cornell.edu)
- Texas Family Code section 2.401, Informal marriage. Texas Legislature(statutes.capitol.texas.gov).gov
- Colorado Revised Statutes section 14-2-109.5, Common law marriages. Colorado General Assembly(leg.colorado.gov).gov