Case Overview
The state of Texas has the concept of common law or informal marriages. This means that without a formal wedding ceremony or documentation, a couple can still be considered married under Texas law as long as there is evidence of an agreement between the two of them, evidence of cohabitation which means they live together, and evidence that they hold themselves out as married to their communities.
David Hofer and Marta Danylyk moved to Texas from New York in 2014 to start a life together in an affordable area. Hofer got a job with the Euless Police Department, Danylyk found work as well, and the couple purchased a house together as community property. In 2016, David Hofer was killed in the line of duty. The Euless Police Department with the support of Hofer’s parents and other volunteers helped Marta obtain documentation to obtain spousal benefits.
The Collin County Probate Court found that Marta was entitled to these benefits as a common law spouse and the Department of Workers Compensation (DWC) came to the same conclusion and awarded them to Danylyk. This decision was challenged by the City of Euless and a trial was held. In this specific context, the City of Euless had to prove that the DWC had made the wrong decision in awarding Marta spousal benefits. So, the City of Euless had to prove that David and Marta did not have a common law marriage by showing that they did not meet at least one of the three elements for common law marriage. Marta did not have to prove anything.
The City of Euless wanted jury instructions to be provided to the jury that would have explained components of common law that the City felt were necessary to ruling in this case. The judge denied these instructions because they added unnecessary detail. The jury found that the City of Euless had not carried its burden to prove that Marta and David did not have had an agreement to be married and that David and Marta did not hold they held themselves out to be married to their communities. This led to the DWC decision to be upheld and Marta’s compensation was affirmed.
The City of Euless appealed this ruling. What is important to understand is that because the Probate Court and DWC board both sided with Danylyk, the burden of proof was on the City of Euless. This means that they had the responsibility to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Marta Danylyk was not an eligible spouse of David Hofer when he died. A preponderance of evidence standard means that they had to prove that it was more likely that they were correct than the other side. The preponderance of evidence is akin to a 51% determination. The jury decided that they failed to do so.
Question of the Trial Case
“Was Marta Danylyk not an eligible spouse of David Hofer at the time of David Hofer’s death?”
Key word here is “not.” This means it is up to the City of Euless to prove that there was no common law marriage. This is different from the most common type of informal marriage case where it is up to the supposed spouse to prove that there is a legally recognizable marriage in place. This difference comes as a result of two prior decisions, from both the Collin County Probate Court and the Department of Workers Compensation, that recognized a marriage was in place.