LUCIANO LOPES VS LUCILIA LOPES Research Essay

The Background

The petitioner, Lucilia Lopes, and Mario Coelho were both of Portuguese descent and had previously been married. In the Dominican Republic, the erstwhile husband and Lucilia divorced in 1972; at the time, they both lived in Connecticut. Notably, the divorce was granted through a contract, and Mario stated in court that he went to the Dominican Republic specifically to get a divorce and that he was only supposed to stay there for a day. Luciana was able to consent to the divorce because she had legal representation during the court procedures.

The Marriage to Luciano Lopes

In the year 1985, Luciana married the accused, Luciano Lopes in the year 1985 and they lived as a married couple for fifteen years after which the petitioner filed a divorce. Among the things that Luciana sought to benefit from the separation included the attorney’s fees, equitable distribution of the family property, and alimony. Under the requirement of the constitution that the husband should respond to the wife’s petition for dissolution of marriage and other relief and his right to counter petition marriage the marriage dissolution, Luciano sought a few things (Florida Dissolution Of Marriage 12). Firstly, the attorney’s fees, payment of his health insurance premiums, equitable distribution, and finally, alimony. After six months, Lopes presented an amended petition seeking a special equity in the bank account balance and the marital home. After one month, he filed another petition alleging that his marriage to Lucilia was legally binding since, at the time of the wedding, Lucilia Dominican divorce from her first husband was invalid. He argued that his former wife was still married Coelho and he sought for the court to carry out a declaratory judgment and invalidate his marriage to Lucilia and consequently seize the sharing of the family wealth.

The Court Ruling

Based on the counterclaim and affirmative defense of Lucilia, the trial judge ruled that she had a legal husband at the time she married Luciano and thus, the court nullified her present marriage. The appellee held the position that he learned about the previous marriage of his former wife two to three years down the line before she filed the divorce. Bearing in mind that both parties were not residents of the Dominican Republic at the time of the divorce, the case was not properly terminated. However, even after learning about the divorce, he remained married to Lucilia based on the court ruling (Florida Dissolution Of Marriage 15). Notably, both parties agreed to the fact that they believed the divorce was still valid until the accused raised the issue in the proceedings. Remarkably, Luciano failed to provide evidence that his former wife was legally divorced in the Dominican Republic or her divorce was invalid under the law of the state since it was obtained when both parties Mr. and Mrs. Coelo were residents of Dominican Republic. However, he claimed that his alleged marriage to Lucilia was null and void since the Florida court could not recognize Coelho’s divorce. The majority opinion held that it was not possible for Lucilia to get into another marriage since her previous marriage was still intact under the law (Florida Dissolution Of Marriage 25). The failure of the Florida court to recognize the Dominican divorce meant that Mr. and Mrs. Coelho did not meet the residency to Florida, but it never intended to validate the marriage. Outstandingly, Lucilia married Luciano in Connecticut, and under the law of the country, Coelho could not have invalidated the marriage there.

Work Cited

Florida Dissolution Of Marriage. Tallahassee, FL, Florida Bar, Continuing Legal Education, 2014,.