Cohabitation Rights

Unlike some other states, North Carolina does not recognize many rights with respect to unmarried parties cohabitating. There is no common law marriage in North Carolina (though North Carolina will recognize a common law marriage created in another state), no palimony, and cohabitation is technically illegal. However, cohabitants (including LGBT couples) can create some financial and property rights concerning their relationship by contract.

Despite North Carolina’s apparent lack of tolerance toward those cohabitating in the state – there were 144,000 unmarried couples living together in North Carolina according to the 2000 census – and there are some protections for cohabitants under contract, quasi-contract, and quantum meruit legal theories in North Carolina.

In the 1988 case of Suggs v. Norris, addressed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals, Judge Wells found that while the Court does not approve of cohabitation, unmarried persons who are cohabitating may enter into enforceable contracts with each other and that “agreements regarding the finances and property of an unmarried but cohabitating couple, whether express or implied, are enforceable as long as sexual services or promises thereof do not provide the consideration.” In essence, a person who has provided non-sexual services or support during a relationship with the understanding that they would receive compensation, may be able to recover for the implied or agreed upon compensation in that agreement. This can be accomplished under contract law or under a theory of quantum meruit (also known as unjust enrichment or equity).

However, once married such contracts may not be available.  In 1993 Judge Wells penned another opinion in Kuder v. Schroder. The Kuder case involved a spouse who had an agreement with her husband to support him through school with the understanding that upon his completion of school, he would provide the total family support and allow her to be a stay-at-home mother and housekeeper. In his opinion, Judge Wells stated that, “we are sympathetic to her apparent dilemma, and certainly would not condone defendant’s apparent knavish ingratitude, but we do not find support in the law of this State for such a claim and therefore hold that the trial court correctly dismissed plaintiff’s claims” and that each spouse owes a duty to the other during the marriage which could not be modified by agreement or contract. Judge Wells reasoned that the Kuder matter was distinguishable from that in Suggs because “[In Suggs,] we sanctioned a claim for remuneration for services performed in a business (farming) enterprise by a person who was cohabiting with, but not married to, a deceased cohabitor. The facts and ruling in [the Suggs] case are in no sense relevant to the facts and issues presented in the case now before us.” In an interesting dissent, Judge Greene disagreed with the majority opinion reasoning that if unmarried persons can contract for services and support, why should not married couples be allowed to modify their duties of support in the same way. Judge Greene stated, “the alternative leaves the non-student supporting spouse with virtually no remedy” because the non-student spouse was the supporting spouse during the marriage making alimony unobtainable and that while the non-student spouse’s efforts to help in the educational pursuits of the other spouse may be a factor in an equitable distribution claim, “this remedy is of little value in cases where the student spouse leaves the supporting spouse immediately or soon after obtaining his professional license” because the sacrifice and debt associated with supporting the spouse in their educational pursuits will likely leave little or no marital property of any value by which the Court could compensate the non-student spouse.

Another potential claim for a cohabiter is a claim for a breach of a promise to marry.

In conclusion, unmarried couples in North Carolina may have a remedy with regard to the shared finances, property, and efforts of the relationship under contract, quasi-contract (including unjust enrichment), quantum meruit, trust and tort theories of North Carolina law.

Disclaimer: Seek legal advice from an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.