ROSALIA MARTINEZ v.

ANGEL TAN
February 5, 1909 || Willard, J.
QUICK SUMMARY: Rosalia and Angel Tan appeared before a justice of the peace and there signed a statement setting
forth that they had agreed to marry each other and asked the justice to solemnize the marriage. Another document was
then signed by them, by the justice and by two witnesses, stating that the man and woman appeared before the justice
and ratified all that was contained in the preceding instrument and insisted upon the marriage. After the signing of these
documents the justice announce to the man and woman that they were married. Held: There was a valid marriage in this
case, sufficiently compliant with section 6 of General Orders, No. 68 which states: No particular form from the ceremony
of marriage is required, but the parties must declare in the presence of the person solemnizing the marriage, that they
take each other as husband and wife.
FACTS: This present action procuring the cancellation of certificated of marriage and damages is instituted by Rosalia
Martinez against Angel Tan. It is said that on 25 September 1901, both parties went to the office of the justice of the peace
where they presented (1) a petition stating that they have mutually agreed to enter into a contract of marriage before the
said justice and to ask him to solemnize the marriage. The contents of this petition was thereby ratified under oath in a (2)
document signed by the justice of the peace and the two parties herein. Thereafter, a (3) certificate of marriage was
issued, which was signed by all three stating that the plaintiff and defendant were legally married by the justice of the
piece in the presence of the witnesses.
Trial Court: Parties were legally married. This was proven by the document itself, evidence of the defendant, witnesses,
and the bailiff of the justice of the peace saying that they all appeared before the justice of the peace and signed the
said document.
ISSUE: W/N a valid marriage took place
HELD: Yes. General orders, No. 68, section 6, provides:
No particular form from the ceremony of marriage is required, but the parties must declare in the presence of the
person solemnizing the marriage, that they take each other as husband and wife.
Zacarias Esmero, one of the witnesses, testified that upon the occasion in question the justice of the peace said nothing
until after the document was signed and then addressing himself to the plaintiff and the defendant said, "You are married."
The petition signed the plaintiff and defendant contained a positive statement that they had mutually agreed to be married
and they asked the justice of the peace to solemnize the marriage. The document signed by the plaintiff, the defendant,
and the justice of the peace, stated that they ratified under oath, before the justice, the contents of the petition and that
witnesses of the marriage were produced. A marriage took place as shown by the certificate of the justice of the
peace, signed by both contracting parties, which certificate gives rise to the presumption that the officer authorized
the marriage in due form, the parties before the justice of the peace declaring that they took each other as
husband and wife, unless the contrary is proved, such presumption being corroborated in this case by the
admission of the woman to the effect that she had contracted the marriage certified to in the document signed by
her, which admission can only mean the parties mutually agreed to unite in marriage when they appeared and signed the
said document which so states before the justice of the peace who authorized the same. It was proven that both the
plaintiff and the defendant were able to read and write the Spanish language, and that they knew the contents of the
document which they signed; and under the circumstances in this particular case were satisfied, and so hold, that what
took place before the justice of the peace on this occasion amounted to a legal marriage.
Defendant is acquitted of the charges against him.