District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 4/25/2019
Brian Gill v. Rodney Van Nostrand
Citations
- 206 A.3d 869
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- acknowledging that the District of Columbia has “long recognized common -law marriages”
- naming evidence of durable cohabitation and the general reputation of the relationship among relatives and acquaintances as factors to weigh in a common-law marriage analysis
- listing elements of common law marriage, with the “general reputation regarding the parties’ relationship” providing mere evidence of those elements
- “We now expressly recognize, as the trial court did and as Obergefell [and other authorities] require, that a same-sex couple may enter into common-law marriage in the District of Columbia and that this rule applies retroactively.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Thompson, Easterly, McLeese
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In re Marriage of LaFleur & PyferSupreme Court of Colorado· 2021-01-11· cited 931×
- In re Marriage of Hogsett & NealeSupreme Court of Colorado· 2021-01-11· cited 510×
- In re the Marriage of Edi L. HOGSETT v. Marcia E. NEALESupreme Court of Colorado· 2021-01-11· cited 342×
- In re the Marriage of Dean LAFLEUR v. Timothy PYFERSupreme Court of Colorado· 2021-01-11· cited 337×
- Swicegood v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2020-07-01
- In re Jenkins JenkinsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2023-03-09
- Yeh v. HnathDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2023-05-25
- Cleary v. ClearyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2024-07-18
- In re Estate of Martin; McCrayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2024-12-19
- Woodland v. KijakaziDistrict of Columbia· 2025-10-14
- In re: Estate of DuraiswamyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2026-04-03
Cites
29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Zablocki v. RedhailSupreme Court· 1978-01-18· cited 1,224×
- Obergefell v. HodgesSupreme Court· 2015-06-26· cited 955×
- Rhonda Ezell v. City of ChicagoSeventh Circuit· 2011-07-06· cited 494×
- Bostic v. SchaeferFourth Circuit· 2014-07-28· cited 192×
- Strauss v. HortonCalifornia Supreme Court· 2009-06-17· cited 65×
- Coleman v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2008-05-22· cited 45×
- IN RE TA.L. IN RE A.L. IN PETITION OF R.W. & A.W. IN RE PETITION OF E.A.A.H. AND T.L.District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2016-12-08· cited 31×
- In Re: Estate of Carter, S., Appeal of: Hunter, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2017-04-17· cited 30×
- Coates v. WattsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1993-03-16· cited 24×
- McCoy v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1969-10-03· cited 20×
- Anderson v. AndersonIndiana Supreme Court· 1956-01-13· cited 19×
- Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & EthicsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2010-07-15· cited 19×
- Herrington v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2010-11-04· cited 19×
- Johnson v. YoungDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1977-04-12· cited 18×
- Bansda v. WheelerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2010-05-13· cited 17×
- Blecher EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1955-03-14· cited 17×
- East v. EastDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1988-02-05· cited 17×
- National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. BrittonDistrict of Columbia· 1960-09-26· cited 13×
- Mayo v. FordDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1962-09-06· cited 11×
- Mesa v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2005-05-12· cited 10×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.