State Ex Rel. Valero v. Park, 2007ca00254 (11-19-2007)

2007 Ohio 6179
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 19, 2007
DocketNo. 2007CA00254.
StatusPublished

This text of 2007 Ohio 6179 (State Ex Rel. Valero v. Park, 2007ca00254 (11-19-2007)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. Valero v. Park, 2007ca00254 (11-19-2007), 2007 Ohio 6179 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007).

Opinions

OPINION
{¶ 1} Relators, Carmelia Valero and Dejan Vasic, have filed a Verified Complaint in Mandamus with a Motion for Alternate Writ. They are requesting the Probate Court Judge be compelled to issue them a marriage license. They are also requesting the Probate Court be ordered to file their application for a marriage license and any order of denial of the application in the Probate Court records. Respondent has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and, in the alternative, a Motion for Summary Judgment. Respondent has also filed a Motion for Protective Order requesting discovery be delayed until this Court's resolution of the Motion to Dismiss. Based upon facts agreed upon by the parties, the Court is able to issue an opinion on the verified complaint in mandamus. Our holding with regard to the complaint necessarily resolves the underlying motions.

{¶ 2} A relator is entitled to a writ of mandamus if the following conditions are satisfied: (1) the relator demonstrates a clear legal right to the relief prayed for; (2) the respondent is under a corresponding legal duty to perform the actions that make up the prayer for relief; and, (3) the relator has no plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Doss Petroleum, Inc. v. Columbiana Cty. Bd. ofElections, 164 Ohio App.3d 255, 2005-Ohio-5633, 842 N.E.2d 66, citing toState ex rel. Berger v. McMonagle (1983), 6 Ohio St.3d 28, 29,451 N.E.2d 225.

{¶ 3} The parties agree Relator Carmelia Valero is a United States citizen who can provide a valid Ohio driver's license in support of her marriage license application. Relator Dejan Vasic is in possession of a valid foreign passport from his native Yugoslavia, however, his visa has expired. *Page 3

{¶ 4} Attached to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is an affidavit from the Probate Judge which states in part, "2. The policy of the Stark County Probate Court is to require a state-issued photo identification, such as a driver's license or state identification card. We also accept valid school photo identification cards. 3. The Stark County Probate Court does not accept foreign passports as proper identification. . . . 6. My part in the events related in the complaint was to confirm to Mr. Renner that my court does not require visas for marriage licenses; and to confirm to my staff that a foreign passport is not proper identification of an applicant for a marriage license."

{¶ 5} The first question before us is whether the Probate Court must accept and record all applications for marriage whether or not a marriage license is issued. The second question before us is whether the Probate Court can refuse to issue a marriage license to a person who is not in possession of a state-issued identification card, state-issued driver's license or valid school photo identification card.

{¶ 6} R.C. 3101.01 describes who may marry:

{¶ 7} (A) Male persons of the age of eighteen years, and female persons of the age of sixteen years, not nearer of kin than second cousins, and not having a husband or wife living, may be joined in marriage. A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. A minor shall first obtain the consent of the minor's parents, surviving parent, parent who is designated the residential parent and legal custodian of the minor by a court of competent jurisdiction, guardian, or any one of the following who has been awarded permanent custody of the minor by a court exercising juvenile jurisdiction:

{¶ 8} (1) An adult person;

{¶ 9} (2) The department of job and family services or any child welfare organization certified by the department;

{¶ 10} (3) A public children services agency.

{¶ 11} And

*Page 4

{¶ 12} R.C. 3101.05 provides, in part:

{¶ 13} (A) The parties to a marriage shall make an application for a marriage license. Each of the persons seeking a marriage license shall personally appear in the probate court within the county where either resides, or, if neither is a resident of this state, where the marriage is expected to be solemnized. If neither party is a resident of this state, the marriage may be solemnized only in the county where the license is obtained. Each party shall make application and shall state upon oath, the party's name, age, residence, place of birth, occupation, father's name, and mother's maiden name, if known, and the name of the person who is expected to solemnize the marriage. If either party has been previously married, the application shall include the names of the parties to any previous marriage and of any minor children, and if divorced the jurisdiction, date, and case number of the decree. If either applicant is under the age of eighteen years, the judge shall require the applicants to state that they received marriage counseling satisfactory to the court. Except as otherwise provided in this division, the application also shall include each party's social security number. In lieu of requiring each party's social security number on the application, the court may obtain each party's social security number, retain the social security numbers in a separate record, and allow a number other than the social security number to be used on the application for reference purposes. If a court allows the use of a number other than the social security number to be used on the application for reference purposes, the record containing the social security number is not a public record, except that, in any of the circumstances set forth in divisions (A)(1) to (4) of section 3101.051 of the Revised Code, the record containing the social security number shall be made available for inspection under section 149.43 of the Revised Code.

{¶ 14} Relators claim they presented an application for a marriage license, but the court refused to accept their application. The Respondent appears to state in her Motion to Dismiss she only accepts applications which are approved for the issuance of the marriage license, "With respect to relators' demand that respondent preserve and maintain marriage license `applications,' it appears plainly from the allegations of the complaint that no marriage license application was accepted for filing . . . "The statute mandates the Probate Court to keep all applications, *Page 5

{¶ 15} Immediately upon receipt of an application for a marriage license, the court shall place the parties' record in a book kept for that purpose. If the probate judge is satisfied that there is no legal impediment and if one or both of the parties are present, the probate judge shall grant the marriage license.

{¶ 16} R.C. 3101.05(A).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Loving v. Virginia
388 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Thompson
782 N.E.2d 688 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2002)
Doss Petroleum, Inc. v. Columbiana County Board of Elections
842 N.E.2d 66 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2005)
Pena v. Northeast Ohio Emergency Affiliates, Inc.
670 N.E.2d 268 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1995)
State ex rel. Taylor v. Glasser
364 N.E.2d 1 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1977)
State ex rel. Berger v. McMonagle
451 N.E.2d 225 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2007 Ohio 6179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-valero-v-park-2007ca00254-11-19-2007-ohioctapp-2007.