Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 23-0767

For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here

In re the Marriage of Nichols and Mauro

Charles F. Nichols, Petitioner-Appellant

Mary E. Molloy Mauro, Respondent-Appellee

Attorney for Appellant

Robert A. Nading II and James T. Munro

Attorney for Appellee

Judy D. Johnson

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Feb 21, 2024

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert J. Blink, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Charles Nichols appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his marriage dissolution petition for failing to prove a common-law marriage with Mary Molloy Mauro.  OPINION HOLDS:  While Nichols has much evidence on his side, he has not carried his burden to prove a common-law marriage.  On balance, the parties’ shifting assertions of married and single status in various contexts reflect an intent to serve their personal convenience or financial benefit—not a present intent and agreement to be married.  Given the close merits of this appeal and the relative financial circumstances of the parties, we decline Molloy Mauro’s request for appellate attorney fees.

© 2024 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.