Michigan
Common Law Marriage in Michigan: 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. · 1 primary source cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Michigan abolished the formation of new common law marriages effective January 1, 1957, under MCL 551.2. No common law marriage can be formed in Michigan on or after that date. Common law marriages entered into in Michigan before January 1, 1957, remain fully valid. Michigan also recognizes a valid common law marriage that was formed in another state.
Information last verified on June 2, 2026.
Does Michigan recognize common law marriage?
Michigan no longer allows couples to form a common law marriage within the state. MCL 551.2 defines marriage as a civil contract to which the consent of capable parties is essential, but the same statute provides that consent alone is not enough to effectuate a legal marriage on and after January 1, 1957. Under that provision, a valid Michigan marriage requires three elements: consent of legally capable parties, a marriage license obtained under MCL 551.101 or MCL 551.201, and solemnization as authorized by MCL 551.7 through 551.18.
Before January 1, 1957, Michigan recognized common law marriages formed under the general common law rule that required mutual present consent to be married, cohabitation, and public holding out as husband and wife. The 1957 effective date represents the legislature's prospective abolition of informal marriage formation. Marriages satisfying the common law requirements before that date remain legally valid and are not affected by the later statutory change.
Because the abolition is prospective only, any couple that established a valid common law marriage under Michigan's pre-1957 common law retains all the rights and obligations of a formally solemnized marriage. Those rights include intestate inheritance, spousal privilege in court proceedings, eligibility for survivor benefits, and standing to seek spousal support in a divorce proceeding.
Why Michigan abolished common law marriage in 1957
The 1957 change brought Michigan in line with a nationwide trend toward requiring formal marriage procedures. The legislature and courts have identified several policy rationales for requiring a license and ceremony: formal procedures create a clear public record of marital status, protect both parties by making the legal and financial consequences of marriage explicit before they are incurred, reduce evidentiary disputes about whether a marriage was ever formed, and simplify estate and benefits administration.

MCL 551.2 was last amended in 1996 through Act 324, but the January 1, 1957, effective date for the consent-alone prohibition was established by the original version of the provision. Michigan courts have consistently applied that date as the dividing line between valid pre-existing common law marriages and unrecognized informal unions formed after abolition.
A couple that has lived together in Michigan for any length of time, presented themselves publicly as married, filed joint tax returns, and genuinely believed they were married has not formed a legally recognized marriage if the relationship began on or after January 1, 1957, and they never obtained a marriage license.
Pre-1957 common law marriages: what remains valid
If both parties to a relationship were living and cohabiting in Michigan before January 1, 1957, and at that time mutually agreed to be presently married, cohabited together as husband and wife, and held themselves out publicly as a married couple, a valid Michigan common law marriage may have been formed. That marriage did not dissolve when the 1957 statute took effect, and it has not been invalidated by any subsequent legislative change.
To establish that a pre-1957 common law marriage existed, a party typically must show evidence of the three traditional elements as they existed before January 1, 1957. Given the age of any such relationship, proof often depends on historical documents: old joint tax returns, deeds or titles identifying the couple as husband and wife, death certificates or obituaries, letters or family correspondence, affidavits from witnesses who knew the couple during the pre-1957 period, and similar historical records.
A pre-1957 common law marriage can only be dissolved the same way any marriage is dissolved: by divorce, annulment, or the death of a spouse.
Does Michigan recognize a common law marriage from another state?
Yes. Michigan gives full legal effect to a common law marriage that was validly formed in a state that permits such marriages. This recognition rests on two legal foundations. The first is the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution, which requires each state to give credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. The second is the principle of comity, under which courts of one state recognize legal relationships validly created under the law of another state.
As of 2026, the states that still permit formation of new common law marriages include Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma (contested), Rhode Island, Texas (called "informal marriage" under Tex. Fam. Code section 2.401), and Utah (which requires a court or administrative order). The District of Columbia also recognizes common law marriage. A couple who validly formed a common law marriage in any of those jurisdictions and then moved to Michigan retains married status in Michigan.
Practically, this means that a couple with a valid out-of-state common law marriage is treated by Michigan courts and agencies as legally married for purposes of divorce, property division, spousal support, inheritance rights, intestate succession, and all other legal incidents of marriage under Michigan law.
To invoke Michigan recognition, a party must show that the marriage met the requirements of the state where it was formed. For example, a couple asserting a Texas informal marriage under Tex. Fam. Code section 2.401 must establish that they agreed to be married, cohabited in Texas, and represented to others that they were married.
How to prove a common law marriage formed in another state
Because a common law marriage leaves no license or official certificate, the burden of proving the marriage rests on the party asserting it. The standard of proof and the specific elements depend on the law of the state where the marriage was formed. Michigan courts evaluating an out-of-state common law marriage look at the same categories of evidence that courts in the forming state would consider.

Evidence commonly considered includes:
- Joint federal or state income tax returns filed as "married filing jointly" or "married filing separately"
- Joint bank accounts, joint mortgage or lease agreements, or jointly titled real property
- Insurance policies or retirement account beneficiary designations listing the partner as a spouse
- Loan applications, government-benefits forms, or employer-benefits documents identifying the relationship as a marriage
- Testimony from family members, friends, neighbors, coworkers, or clergy who knew the couple as married
- Written correspondence, social media posts, or other documents in which the parties referred to each other as husband, wife, or spouse
- Use of a shared last name
- Affidavits signed by both parties or by knowledgeable third parties
No single item is conclusive. Courts assess the totality of the evidence against the requirements of the state where the marriage was allegedly formed.
The 7-year myth
A widespread belief holds that living together for 7 years automatically creates a common law marriage, or that separating for 7 years automatically dissolves one. Neither claim is true anywhere in the United States.
No state, including the states that still permit common law marriage formation, sets a minimum number of years of cohabitation as a requirement or automatic trigger. The states that allow common law marriage formation focus on mutual intent and conduct: a present agreement to be married, cohabitation in the permitting state, and public representation of the marital relationship. Duration of cohabitation may be circumstantial evidence of intent, but no fixed number of years is required or sufficient by itself.
In Michigan, this point is particularly clear because common law marriage formation has been prohibited since January 1, 1957. No period of cohabitation after that date, whether 7 years or 57 years, creates a marriage in Michigan without a license and ceremony.
How a common law marriage ends in Michigan
A valid common law marriage, wherever it was formed, can only be terminated by formal legal divorce proceedings, annulment, or the death of a spouse. There is no such thing as a "common law divorce," and Michigan law provides no mechanism for informally dissolving a marriage.

Simply separating, dividing property informally, or ceasing to present as a married couple does not end a legal marriage. A Michigan resident with a valid pre-1957 Michigan common law marriage or a valid out-of-state common law marriage who "separates" without obtaining a divorce remains legally married. Attempting to remarry in Michigan without a prior divorce would create a void or voidable second marriage.
Divorce proceedings to dissolve a common law marriage in Michigan proceed under Michigan law in the same manner as any other Michigan divorce. The court applies Michigan's equitable distribution principles, the spousal support factors under MCL 552.23, and the same jurisdictional and procedural rules that govern any dissolution action.
For more on the financial aspects of ending a Michigan marriage, see Michigan alimony laws and Michigan 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 in Michigan and is not legal advice. Marriage and family law determinations are fact-specific and depend on the individual circumstances of each case. This information was verified as of June 2, 2026. Consult a licensed Michigan family law attorney for advice about your specific situation.
Last updated: June 2, 2026.
More Michigan Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Michigan recognize common law marriage?
Michigan no longer allows new common law marriages to be formed in the state. MCL 551.2 abolished common law marriage formation effective January 1, 1957, by providing that consent alone is not enough to create a legal marriage on and after that date. A license and solemnization are required. Common law marriages validly formed in Michigan before January 1, 1957, remain fully recognized, and Michigan recognizes valid common law marriages formed in other states.
What is the cutoff date for common law marriage in Michigan?
January 1, 1957. MCL 551.2 states that consent alone is not enough to effectuate a legal marriage on and after January 1, 1957. Any common law marriage validly formed in Michigan before that date remains valid. No common law marriage can be formed in Michigan on or after January 1, 1957.
Is 7 years of living together considered common law marriage in Michigan?
No. This is a myth. Michigan does not allow common law marriage formation at all for relationships beginning on or after January 1, 1957. Even before that date, Michigan did not require any specific number of years of cohabitation. The 7-year figure has no basis in Michigan law or in the law of any other state.
Does Michigan recognize a common law marriage from another state?
Yes. Michigan recognizes a common law marriage that was validly formed in a state that permits such marriages, under the Full Faith and Credit Clause and comity principles. A couple who formed a valid common law marriage in Colorado, Texas, Iowa, or another permitting state and later moved to Michigan retains that marital status in Michigan.
How do you end a common law marriage in Michigan?
A valid common law marriage ends only through formal divorce, annulment, or the death of a spouse. There is no common law divorce. A couple with a valid pre-1957 Michigan common law marriage or a valid out-of-state common law marriage must obtain a divorce decree from an appropriate court. Simply separating or stopping cohabitation does not dissolve a legal marriage.
How do I prove a pre-1957 Michigan common law marriage?
Evidence of a pre-1957 Michigan common law marriage typically includes historical records showing the couple presented themselves as married before January 1, 1957: old joint tax returns, deeds or titles identifying both parties as husband and wife, death certificates, letters or family correspondence from the period, and affidavits from people who knew the couple as married at that time. Courts look at the totality of the evidence.
Which Michigan statute governs common law marriage?
MCL 551.2 is the key provision. It defines marriage as a civil contract requiring the consent of capable parties, but states that consent alone is not enough to effectuate a legal marriage on and after January 1, 1957. A valid Michigan marriage also requires a license under MCL 551.101 or MCL 551.201 and solemnization under MCL 551.7 through 551.18.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
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.
Michigan Compiled Laws
§ 551.101Marriage license; requirements; place to obtain, delivery to person officiatingIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
It shall be necessary for all parties intending to be married to obtain a marriage license from the county clerk of the county in which either the man or woman resides, and to deliver the said license to the clergyman or magistrate who is to officiate, before the marriage can be performed. If both parties to be married are non-residents of the state it shall be necessary to obtain such license from the county clerk of the county in which the marriage is to be performed.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 4 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2025
Leading cases:
- National Pride at Work, Inc v. Governor (Michigan Supreme Court 2008, 481 Mich. 56)“…5.4; MCL 551.5; MCL 551.51. 42 See MCL 551.101 through 551.103 43…”
- Karen Sue Lueck v. James Frederick Lueck (Michigan Court of Appeals 2019)“…ve their union recognized as a “legal marriage” pursuant to MCL 551.101, which states in relevant part:…”
- People of Michigan v. Stephen Scott Horton (Michigan Court of Appeals 2025)“…Michigan does not recognize common-law marriage. MCL 551.2; MCL 551.101; Lueck v Lueck, 328 Mich App 399, 405;…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 551.2Marriage as civil contract; consent; license; solemnizationIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
So far as its validity in law is concerned, marriage is a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of parties capable in law of contracting is essential. Consent alone is not enough to effectuate a legal marriage on and after January 1, 1957. Consent shall be followed by obtaining a license as required by section 1 of Act No. 128 of the Public Acts of 1887, being section 551.101 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or as provided for by section 1 of Act No. 180 of the Public Acts of 1897, being section 551.201 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and solemnization as authorized by sections 7 to 18 of this chapter.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cross-referenced in the statute itself: § 551.101, § 551.201
Cited in 25 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2025
Leading cases:
- National Pride at Work, Inc v. Governor (Michigan Supreme Court 2008, 481 Mich. 56)“…en individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.”); MCL 551.2 (“[M]arriage is a civil contract betwee…”
- Ford v. Wagner (Michigan Court of Appeals 1986, 153 Mich. App. 466)“…ccrue as the result of a legal marriage which complies with MCL 551.2; MSA 25.2. No legal rights accrue based…”
- May v. Leneair (Michigan Court of Appeals 1980, 99 Mich. App. 209)“…afin v Serafin, 401 Mich 629 ; 258 NW2d 461 (1977), MCL 551.2; MSA 25.2, 16 Michigan Law & Practice,…”
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)
§ 551.201Issuance of marriage license without publicity; orderIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) When an individual desires to keep the exact date of his or her marriage to an individual of the opposite sex a secret, the probate judge may issue, without publicity, a marriage license to any individual making application, under oath, if there is good reason expressed in the application and determined to be sufficient by the probate judge. (2) The probate judge may authorize an order nunc pro tunc regarding the date to appear on the marriage license.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 1 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 1969
Leading cases:
- Baum v. Baum (Michigan Court of Appeals 1969, 20 Mich. App. 68)“…to appellant. All concurred. * MCLA § 551.201 (Stat Ann 1965 Cum Supp §25.51).…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 551.7Persons authorized to solemnize marriage; records; return of licenses and certificates; disposition of fees charged by mayor or county clerkIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Marriages may be solemnized by any of the following: (a) A judge of the district court, anywhere in this state. (b) A district court magistrate, anywhere in this state. (c) A municipal judge, in the city in which the judge is serving or in a township over which a municipal court has jurisdiction under section 9928 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.9928. (d) A judge of probate, anywhere in this state. (e) A judge of a federal court. (f) A mayor of a city, anywhere in a county in which that city is located. (g) A county clerk in the county in which the clerk serves, or in another county with the written authorization of the clerk of the other county. (h) For a county having more than 1,500,000 inhabitants, an employee of the county clerk's office designated by the county clerk, in the county in which the clerk serves. (i) A minister of the gospel or cleric or religious practitioner, anywhere in this state, if the minister or cleric or religious practitioner is ordained or authorized to solemnize marriages according to the usages of the denomination.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 3 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2019
Leading cases:
- National Pride at Work, Inc v. Governor (Michigan Supreme Court 2008, 481 Mich. 56)“…MCL 551.101 through 551.103 43 See MCL 551.7; MCL 551.9; MCL 551.15; MCL 552.104; MC…”
- Karen Sue Lueck v. James Frederick Lueck (Michigan Court of Appeals 2019)“…n Compiled Laws, and solemnization as authorized by [MCL 551.7 to MCL 551.18]. Michigan law re…”
- Deboer v. Snyder (District Court, E.D. Michigan 2014, 973 F. Supp. 2d 757)“…two witnesses and a person with statutory authority. See Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 551.7 , 551.9. . The Court notes, howev…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 552.23Judgment of divorce or separate maintenance; further award of real and personal estate; transmittal of payments to department of human services; service fee; failure or refusal to pay service fee; contempt; "state disbursement unit" or "SDU" definedIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
(1) Upon entry of a judgment of divorce or separate maintenance, if the estate and effects awarded to either party are insufficient for the suitable support and maintenance of either party and any children of the marriage who are committed to the care and custody of either party, the court may also award to either party the part of the real and personal estate of either party and spousal support out of the real and personal estate, to be paid to either party in gross or otherwise as the court considers just and reasonable, after considering the ability of either party to pay and the character and situation of the parties, and all the other circumstances of the case. (2) Upon certification by a county department of human services that a complainant or petitioner in a proceeding under this chapter is receiving public assistance either personally or for children of the marriage, payments received by the friend of the court or the state disbursement unit for the support and education of the children or maintenance of the party shall be transmitted to the department of human services.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.mi.gov
Cited in 160 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2026
Leading cases:
- Loutts v. Loutts (Michigan Court of Appeals 2012, 298 Mich. App. 21)“…Id. at 86 . This Court disagreed and determined that MCL 552.23 4 and MCL 552.28 require courts to con…”
- Myland v. Myland (Michigan Court of Appeals 2010, 290 Mich. App. 691)“…quitable under the circumstances of this case. We hold that MCL 552.23 prohibits the use of rigid and arbitrar…”
- Reeves v. Reeves (Michigan Court of Appeals 1998, 226 Mich. App. 490)“…t for the suitable support and maintenance of either party. MCL 552.23; MSA 25.103. In light of the trial cour…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Michigan Spousal Support (Alimony) Laws: How It Works (2026)
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 in Arizona: Is It Recognized? (2026), Common Law Marriage in Arkansas: Is It Recognized? (2026), Common Law Marriage in Delaware: Is It Recognized? (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- MCL 551.2, Marriage as Civil Contract(legislature.mi.gov)
- MCL 551.101, Marriage License Application(legislature.mi.gov)
- MCL 552.23, Spousal Support Award(legislature.mi.gov)
- U.S. Constitution Article IV section 1 Full Faith and Credit Clause(law.cornell.edu)
- Texas Family Code section 2.401 Informal Marriage(statutes.capitol.texas.gov)
- Colorado Revised Statutes section 14-2-109.5, Common Law Marriages. Colorado General Assembly(leg.colorado.gov).gov