COHABATION....HERE IS THE LAW, By Richard W. Hechter, J.D., MBA

I had the privilege of making precedent in Minnesota with Judge Bruce Manning on the subject of cohabitation. This is such an important subject, I wanted to publish this article, again, to "warn" and help those who chose to live together without the benefit of marriage. More importantly, what the costs and losses are with a break-up and no marriage.

Minnesota has very specific cohabitation statutes. See Minn. Stat. 513.075 and 513.076. These two statutes (under "FRAUD" categories) provide very specifically that if you live together in a sexual relationship and without marriage, and if you break up, neither you nor your ex-partner can sue the other for any financial reimbursements or equity in one's home - unless the home is titled JOINTLY in the name of both parties; or unless you have a written contract setting forth the financial balance and reimbursements to occur upon break-up.

The key statute states: Unless the individuals have executed a contract complying with the provisions of section 513.075 , the courts of this state are without jurisdiction to hear and shall or MUST dismiss as contrary to public policy any claim by an individual to the earnings or property of another individual if the claim is based on the fact that the individuals lived together in contemplation of sexual relations and out of wedlock within or without this state.

In my case, I represented a nice woman who had lived with her partner (as a loving gay couple) for 12 years. They were never married, never had any civil union ceremony and had no cohabitation agreement. As it goes, there was a break-up and my client's long time partner left my client's home. The home was NOT jointly titled.

After the breakup, the ex-partner sued my client for six figures for a variety of things, including reimbursement or equity in my client's home; and reimbursement for some of the appliances and improvements the EX paid for.

This was a very contentious and high conflict case. Money was no object for the scorned EX. Our key defense was the cohabitation statutes set forth above. The Ex's attorney came up with as many creative theories as possible to get around the statute. In particular, the opposing attorney argued the Statute was "unconstitutional" because it expressly states when a "man and woman" live together....... . Here is the language still on the books for 2018 - 2019.

"If sexual relations between the parties are contemplated, a contract between a man and a woman who are living together in this state out of wedlock, is only enforceable if in writing....". See Minn. Stat. 513.075.

The opposing attorney also argued "constructive trusts", equity, estoppel and too many other claims to mention and explain here. To make a long story short, Judge Manning ruled in my client's favor and denied the EX partner any equity, claim or reimbursement in the home, the appliances, driveway, etc; and, denied claims for financial reimbursement. The case was not appealed and to my knowledge, there are no appellate cases dealing with gay cohabitation break-ups.

The lay person's explanation for this ruling makes a lot of sense. It is what I also argued. Look, when you are in love and living together, the bills paid, the splitting of the mortgage and other expenditures and made as "gifts of love". The payments are not "loans" or conditional payments". As the court and I reasoned, if you intended to be reimbursed for all of the things you paid for in the relationship, you have to show it was a loan or lending situation and not simply gifts of love to help the other out. IF it really was a business situation or any situation with expectation of payback, there should have been either a contract, or marriage. Divorce laws will make things right, but to avail to the divorce laws, you need to get married first!! Thus, common law marriage (just living together) is not enough to be protected under divorce laws. Minnesota does NOT recognize common law marriage.

The take-away is that if you are going to live with a lover, and if you want some assurances and guarantees that you will get some type of reimbursement for all of the expenses you are going to help your lover with, then you need a written, witnessed, notarized and signed cohabitation agreement. Otherwise, helping to pay your "boyfriend's" credit cards, student loans, car payments, child support, etc, will be deemed "gifts of love" with little chance of being reimbursed unless: 1. You have a written cohabitation agreement; and/or, you are on the title of the car or home you buy together. You have been warned. For more information, contact Attorney Richard Hechter, Minneapolis, MN. 612-333-3343 rich@robichaudlaw.com Robichaud Schroepfer & Correia, P.A. Your full service family law firm.