California Family Code Section 2210

Summary: This statute makes a marriage voidable (i.e., subject to annulment) if certain defects existed at the time of the wedding. In plain language, a marriage can be annulled if when the couple married: one party was under 18 without required parental/court consent; one party was already married (bigamy) and the prior marriage was still in effect (unless the prior spouse had been missing for 5 years or believed dead); a party was mentally incapacitated at the time (unless they later recovered and continued living together); the marriage consent was obtained by fraud (unless the deceived party, after learning of the fraud, continued to live with the other as spouses); the marriage consent was obtained by force (unless the forced party later freely cohabited); or one party was physically incapable of entering marriage (e.g. unable to consummate) and that incapacity is incurable. In short, Family Code 2210 lists the grounds (subdivisions (a)–(f)) under which a marriage, while valid on its face, can be nullified if one of these conditions is proven.

Real-World Examples

A 17-year-old runs away and marries without parental permission. Because the spouse was under 18 at the wedding (and had no court-approved consent), the marriage is voidable under 2210(a) and can be annulled.
Someone marries believing their spouse’s first husband died. Later it turns out the first husband was alive the whole time. Under 2210(b), the second marriage is voidable on bigamy grounds because a prior marriage was still in force (the missing spouse exception did not apply).
If a person is so intoxicated or mentally ill at a wedding that they cannot understand the marriage contract, the marriage is voidable under 2210(c) (unsound mind). For example, a person drugged at their ceremony could annul once they recover and prove they never really consented.
A common scenario involves fraud under 2210(d). For example, if a spouse lied about marrying only to obtain a green card or support and secretly continued an affair, this fraudulent inducement to marry is voidable. However, if the deceived spouse learns of the fraud and then continues to live together freely, 2210(d) bars annulment.
If at the time of marriage one spouse is impotent or otherwise physically unable to have sex (and it cannot be cured), the marriage is voidable under 2210(f). For instance, a spouse who cannot consummate the marriage due to a physical condition could seek annulment under this clause.

Notable Cases

In re Marriage of Goodwin-Mitchell & Mitchell (2019) 40 Cal.App.5th 232, 253 Cal.Rptr.3d 123 – The Court of Appeal reversed an annulment. The wife had sued to void the marriage for fraud (2210(d)) after discovering her husband was unfaithful. Although the husband’s fraud (immigration/affair scheme) went to the marital relationship, the court held the wife was not entitled to annulment because, after learning the truth, she freely cohabited with him as spouses. Under 2210(d), that subsequent cohabitation defeated her annulment claim. The court emphasized that an annulment for fraud requires an “extreme case” and that cohabitation with knowledge of the fraud bars relief.
In re Marriage of Ramirez (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 751, 81 Cal.Rptr.3d 180 – Here the husband concealed a long-running affair with the wife’s sister and married the wife under false pretenses. The appellate court held this was fraud “going to the heart of the marriage relationship,” making the marriage voidable under 2210(d). The annulment was affirmed. The court reiterated that fraud must directly defeat the marital relationship (citing 2210(d)), and it found the husband’s deceit (marrying without fidelity) satisfied that test. Thus, in an “extreme case” of premeditated infidelity, 2210(d) authorized annulment despite cohabitation.
In re Marriage of Meagher & Maleki (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 1, 31 Cal.Rptr.3d 663 – The court reversed a trial court’s annulment for fraud. A husband’s extensive pre-wedding financial misrepresentations to a wealthy wife were held insufficient for annulment. Citing 2210(d)’s requirement, the court ruled that only an “extreme case” of fraud that “goes to the very essence of the marriage relation” can support annulment. Fraud involving money in a business venture did not meet that stringent standard. The decision stresses that annulment for fraud is narrowly applied: the deceit must directly affect fundamental marital duties (e.g. intent to remain faithful) and not merely be grounds for contract rescission.

Statutory Text

Family Code Section 2210:
A marriage is voidable and may be adjudged a nullity if any of the following conditions existed at the time of the marriage:

(a) The party who commences the proceeding (or on whose behalf it is commenced) was under 18 years of age, unless the marriage was entered into under Family Code §§302-303.

(b) The spouse of either party was living and the marriage with that spouse was then in force, and that spouse was either (1) absent and not known to be living for five successive years immediately before the subsequent marriage, or (2) generally reputed or believed by the marrying party to be dead at the time of the marriage.

(c) Either party was of unsound mind at the time of marriage, unless the party of unsound mind, after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as spouse.

(d) The consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless the party whose consent was obtained by fraud afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as spouse.

(e) The consent of either party was obtained by force, unless the party whose consent was obtained by force afterwards freely cohabited with the other as spouse.

(f) Either party was, at the time of marriage, physically incapable of entering into the marriage state, and that incapacity continues and appears to be incurable.

Disclaimer: This information is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for advice about your specific situation.