Which states recognize common law marriage?

States that still create them

• Colorado — recognized; the Colorado Supreme Court restated the test in 2021 in terms that also fit same-sex couples.
• Iowa and Kansas — recognized; both require the usual agreement, cohabitation and holding out.
• Montana — recognized, and courts apply the requirements fairly generously.
• Oklahoma — recognized by court decisions despite statutes that seem to require a license.
• Rhode Island — recognized, but the courts require clear and convincing proof.
• Texas — called “informal marriage”; can be proved by a recorded declaration or by agreement, cohabitation in Texas and holding out.
• Utah — a relationship can be recognized as a marriage only through a court or administrative order, which must be sought during the relationship or within a year after it ends.
• District of Columbia — recognized.
• New Hampshire — only after one partner dies, for inheritance, and only after three years of cohabitation and acknowledgment as spouses.

States that abolished them but honor older ones

Pennsylvania (formed before January 1, 2005), Ohio (before October 10, 1991), Indiana (before January 1, 1958), Georgia (before January 1, 1997), Florida (before January 1, 1968), Idaho (before January 1, 1996), South Carolina (before July 24, 2019) and Alabama (before January 1, 2017). If the relationship met all the requirements before the cut-off, the marriage remains valid today, however long ago it began. Several other states abolished common law marriage much earlier; claims based on those are now rare.

Why the list is not the whole answer

The place where the marriage was formed is what matters, not where you live now. A couple who met Texas requirements while living in Texas stays married after moving to New York, and needs a New York divorce to end it. Conversely, moving to Texas after years of living together elsewhere does not create a marriage retroactively — the requirements must be met while living in Texas. A few states have held that a couple living in a non-recognizing state can form a common law marriage during extended stays in a recognizing one; most courts are skeptical of that argument.

Texas deadlines

Texas has two features worth knowing. It allows a signed Declaration of Informal Marriage to be recorded with the county clerk, which removes most of the later argument about whether the marriage existed. And if a couple separates without recording one, a lawsuit to prove the marriage must generally be filed within two years of the separation, or the law presumes there was no agreement to be married.

Federal recognition

Federal agencies generally follow state law. The IRS, the Social Security Administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs recognize a common law marriage valid in the state where it was formed, which can matter for joint tax filing, spousal and survivor benefits and military family benefits. Each agency has its own forms for proving the marriage, usually statements from both spouses and from relatives.

Why it matters in practice

The question arises in divorces (whether there is a marriage to divide property under), in probate (whether a surviving partner inherits as a spouse), in wrongful death cases (whether the partner can sue as a spouse), and in benefit claims. Because the answer controls who receives property and money, these disputes are often bitterly contested by other relatives.

If you do not want one

In a recognizing state, the standard protection is a written cohabitation agreement stating that the parties are not married and do not intend to be, together with consistent paperwork — filing taxes as single and avoiding describing each other as spouses on forms. This matters most where property is shared or one partner has significantly more assets.

If you believe you have one

Gather documents from the period of the relationship: tax returns, leases and deeds, insurance and benefit forms, bank statements, cards and letters, and names of people who knew you as a married couple. Then speak to a family law attorney in the state where the relationship was formed, since that state's law will decide the question.