Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-111 (2026)

Requirement of license and solemnization; covenant marriages

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. A marriage shall not be contracted by agreement without a marriage ceremony.

B. A marriage contracted within this state is not valid unless all of the following occur:

1. A license is issued as provided in this title.

2. The marriage is solemnized by a person authorized by law to solemnize marriages or by a person purporting to act in such capacity and believed in good faith by at least one of the parties to be so authorized.

3. The marriage is solemnized before the expiration of the marriage license.

C. The requirements of this section do not apply to the conversion of an existing marriage that is valid in this state to a covenant marriage that complies with the requirements of section 25-902.  

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1964–2025 · leading case: Moran v. Moran, 933 P.2d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Moran v. Moran, 933 P.2d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 26× “He argued that the marriage contract created a legal and lawful marriage and that A.R.S. §§ 25-111 and 25-121 are invalid, as applied to his marriage contract, because the requirement of a marriage license interfered with his free exercise of his constitutionally-protected…”
Marriage of Donlann v. MacGurn, 55 P.3d 74 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 7× “¶ 23 Husband argues that § 25-111 is limited to marriages contracted in Arizona.”
State v. Watkins, 614 P.2d 835 (Ariz. 1980). · cites it 4× “A husband for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent, nor can either, during the marriage or afterwards, be, without consent of the other, examined as to any communication made by one to the other during the marriage.”…”
Gamez v. Indus. Comm'n, 559 P.2d 1094 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 8× “It is undisputed that, as the hearing officer found, Cruz and Miguel did not participate in a civil ceremony before the office of the Civil Registry in Mexico as would be required under Mexican law, and never executed a marriage license nor participated in a wedding ceremony in…”
State v. Fischer, 199 P.3d 663 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 25-111(B)(l); see also Moran v. Moran, 188 Ariz.”
Marriage of Barnett v. Jedynak, 200 P.3d 1047 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “1987); A.R.S. § 25-111 (2007). “[I]n the absence of an express or implied agreement, no quasi-marital property rights accrue as a result of cohabitation” in Arizona.”
Vandever v. Indus. Com'n of Arizona, 714 P.2d 866 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 6× “The couple recited marriage vows to each other during the course of a friend’s wedding ceremony the following month, but failed to obtain a license or otherwise comply with the formalities of a valid marriage contracted within the state as set forth in A.R.S. § 25-111. 1…”
Marriage of Barbosa-Johnson v. Johnson, 851 P.2d 866 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “Second, the argument is meritless because A.R.S. § 25-111 is expressly limited to marriages solemnized “within this state” and does not apply to this marriage.”
Smith v. Mangum, 747 P.2d 609 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. §§ 25-111 and 25-112(A). 2 . In this opinion we use the terms "cohabitation” and "de facto marriage” to describe a situation in which the spouse receiving spousal maintenance is living with and engaging in a sexual relationship with another person, under circumstances…”
State v. Guadagni, 178 P.3d 473 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “3 ¶ 10 Section 25-111, A.R.S., sets forth the requirements for a lawful marriage in Arizona: A.”
Rivera v. Rivera, 243 P.3d 1148 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). “2d at 1211 (quoting Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 25-111(B)[ (1) (1999) ]).”
Mission Ins. v. Indus. Comm'n, 559 P.2d 1085 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 4× “Thrash held themselves out to the public both in Kansas and in Arizona as husband and wife, travelled together as husband and wife, filed tax returns jointly as husband and wife and signed documents as Mr. and Mrs. Thrash. No evidence was presented that either ever denied that…”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-111(B) — 3 cases
Marriage of Donlann v. MacGurn, 55 P.3d 74 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). “¶ 23 Husband argues that § 25-111 is limited to marriages contracted in Arizona.”
Rivera v. Rivera, 243 P.3d 1148 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). “2d at 1211 (quoting Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 25-111(B)[ (1) (1999) ]).”
Marriage of Barbosa-Johnson v. Johnson, 851 P.2d 866 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). “Second, the argument is meritless because A.R.S. § 25-111 is expressly limited to marriages solemnized “within this state” and does not apply to this marriage.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-111(B)(2) — 1 case
Marriage of Donlann v. MacGurn, 55 P.3d 74 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). “¶ 23 Husband argues that § 25-111 is limited to marriages contracted in Arizona.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-111(B)(l) — 1 case
State v. Fischer, 199 P.3d 663 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “A.R.S. § 25-111(B)(l); see also Moran v. Moran, 188 Ariz.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.