Marital Tangles

The law imitates life, and when it must sort out marital tangles, it is often as complex as the human relationships themselves. Two recent cases:

P:When her 18-year marriage was about to end, Los Angeles Housewife Claire Glickman was worried that her soon to be ex-husband Gerald, a sometime salesman, would not make the alimony and child-support payments. She decided that she would agree to the divorce only if the woman he planned to marry, Hilda Collins, guaranteed to pay if he did not. Sure enough, after two years Gerald was behind in his payments. Meanwhile his marriage to Hilda had broken up. Claire sued Hilda for $8,852.80 owed by Gerald. The California Supreme Court ruled that an agreement is an agreement--however novel it might be. So the second former Mrs. Glickman must now pay up to the first.

P: Nine years ago, the Frank Bagnardis of Watervliet, N.Y., adopted a young teenage girl named Lleuwana. The couple separated two years later, and when they were finally divorced in 1973, Frank got custody of Lleuwana and his own four natural children. Last year he decided to marry Lleuwana; they were refused a marriage license and went to court. But Trial Judge William R. Murray recently decided that the state law on "incestuous and void" marriage applies only to blood relatives. So Frank, 50, and Lleuwana, 23, are now Mr. and Mrs. as well as father and daughter.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.