In Oklahoma, a judge unwittingly granted a divorce to two gay women who had married in Canada. The women had filed using just their first initials and last names. On discovering that both members of the couple were women, the judge revoked the divorce, on grounds that they had never been legally married. The state's Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that although the judge had the right to throw out the divorce, he erred in not giving the women proper notice.
Ormiston said she didn't go into marriage with the intention of divorcing. She said her relationship with Chambers, who has not talked to the press, started to deteriorate after they moved from a large house into a smaller condominium. When she ultimately moved out, it was with great sadness, she said, but she never imagined that divorce wouldn't be an option.
"I'm a 61-year-old woman who always votes and pays my taxes," said Ormiston, who is retired after a career working for nonprofit organizations and in real estate. "I'm a good citizen, a good American. And then to be told I don't have the same rights as everyone else."
Boston attorney Jo Ann Citron, who has handled gay divorces in Massachusetts and New York, said couples seldom anticipate divorce when they marry. Nevertheless, she said, "the single most important benefit of marriage is divorce . . . a predictable process by which property is divided, debt is apportioned and custodial arrangements are made for children."
In the absence of that option, Ormiston and Chambers are trying to work out an agreement on their own to divide property and assets. But Ormiston said she worries about the future.
"If I fall in love again to that degree and want to spend the rest of my life with a person, I want the option of marriage," she said.
But to marry again without first obtaining a divorce would be considered bigamy under the law.
The way Pugno sees it, situations like Ormiston's, though unfortunate, are predictable outcomes of bad public policy.
"California and Massachusetts have taken a radical departure from the norm in terms of marriage," he said. "Couples who take advantage of same-sex marriage laws in those places have to face that they will have a difficult time bringing those marriages back to their home states."
Ormiston said her legal setbacks have left her determined to keep fighting.
"I was not an activist before, she said. "But I will be one forever now."
--
sue.horton@latimes.com