Informal marriage is what Texas law calls a marriage undertaken without a ceremony. Colloquially this is a “common law” marriage. In a significant decision issued in March 2025, the Texas First Court of Appeals reversed part of a final divorce decree in Montemayor v. Montemayor, concluding that the trial court erred by determining the parties were informally married on January 1, 2012. The court upheld the divorce and child custody portions of the ruling but remanded the case for a new division of the marital estate. This case provides an important reminder for family law practitioners and divorcing parties alike about the evidentiary burdens of proving an informal marriage—and the impact such a finding can have on asset distribution.
At Griffin, Cain & Herbig, Attorneys at Law, PLLC, we often see how disputed marriage dates affect the outcome of divorce proceedings. This ruling underscores the need for clear pleadings, timely objections, and strong evidentiary support when informal marriage claims arise—especially in courts throughout Conroe and The Woodlands, Texas.
Background: Dispute Over the Marriage Date
Aldo and Lizeth Montemayor were married ceremonially in January 2013 but had lived together since at least 2011. They had two children together, one born in 2012 (before the ceremonial marriage). Both parties filed for divorce in Harris County and agreed to a partial mediated settlement agreement (MSA) covering conservatorship and support issues.
The real dispute arose over the property division—specifically the marital residence in Baytown, a semi-truck used in Aldo’s business, and a parcel of real estate in Mexico. Lizeth claimed the parties were informally married as early as January 1, 2012, which would have significant implications for whether the Baytown home was community or separate property. Aldo, however, insisted they were not married before their 2013 ceremony and that certain assets—including the home—were his separate property.
Trial Court Ruling
After a bench trial, the court found that the parties were married on or about January 1, 2012, and based its property division on that finding. Lizeth was awarded the Baytown house, while Aldo was awarded the Mexico property, his trucking business, and other financial accounts and vehicles. The trial court declined to award Aldo any reimbursement or share of the equity in the Baytown property, which had been deeded in both parties’ names in 2012.
Aldo appealed, challenging the trial court’s finding that they had an informal marriage prior to their ceremonial marriage. He argued that Lizeth had failed to plead for adjudication of an informal marriage and that the evidence did not establish the required legal elements.
Legal Framework: Informal Marriage in Texas
Under Texas law, an informal (or common-law) marriage requires proof of three elements:
-
An agreement to be married.
-
Cohabitation in Texas as spouses.
-
Holding out to others as a married couple.
All three elements must occur simultaneously. Courts are strict in applying this standard because informal marriages can dramatically affect the characterization of assets acquired before a ceremonial wedding.
Appellate Court’s Analysis
The First Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court erred by finding the parties were married on January 1, 2012. Although Lizeth alleged in her counterpetition that the marriage began “on or about January 1, 2012,” the court found that she failed to present sufficient evidence proving all three statutory elements required to establish an informal marriage by that date.
Critically, while both parties admitted to living together in 2011 and Lizeth testified, they “started claiming marriage” in 2012, there was no clear evidence showing an agreement to be married or consistent representations to others as spouses beginning exactly on January 1, 2012. Aldo’s testimony was equivocal, and although the deed to the Baytown house listed them as “husband and wife,” it was not executed until August 2012.
Because the court’s informal marriage finding affected how the Baytown house—a key marital asset—was treated, the appellate court reversed the property division portion of the decree and sent the matter back to the trial court for further proceedings.
Key Takeaways for Texas Divorce Cases
This decision in Montemayor v. Montemayor is instructive in several ways:
-
Informal marriage must be proved with precision: Vague testimony like “we started claiming marriage in 2012” is not enough. Parties must show clear evidence of an agreement, cohabitation, and public representation as spouses.
-
Pleading specificity matters—but objections must be timely: Although Aldo argued that Lizeth didn’t plead for informal marriage, he didn’t file special exceptions to clarify the pleadings before trial. The court found Lizeth’s pleading of the January 1, 2012, date gave sufficient notice.
-
Marital status can define property rights: Whether a couple was married at the time a home or asset was acquired can determine whether that asset is community or separate property. In this case, the 2012 deed to the Baytown house was pivotal.
-
A reversal of property division can happen: While appeals rarely result in a full reversal of a divorce decree, this case shows that when trial courts misapply the law—especially regarding property rights—an appellate court will intervene.
Legal Counsel Can Make the Difference
If you’re facing a complex divorce involving disputed marriage dates, co-owned property, or informal marriage claims in Conroe or The Woodlands, Texas, working with experienced attorneys is crucial. At Griffin, Cain & Herbig, Attorneys at Law, PLLC, we help clients navigate the nuances of Texas family law and protect their financial futures.
Contact us today at (936) 539-1011 to schedule a consultation and learn how we can assist with your divorce or custody matter.
Brian Cain, Partner
Griffin, Cain & Herbig Attorneys at Law, PPLC
