Cal. Codes » Family Code / DIVISION 6. NULLITY, DISSOLUTION, AND LEGAL SEPARATION / PART 2. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF VOID OR VOIDABLE MARRIAGE / CHAPTER 1. Void Marriage
California Codes

Cal. Family Code § 2200 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Marriages between parents and children, ancestors and descendants of every degree, and between siblings of the half as well as the whole blood, and between uncles or aunts and nieces or nephews, are incestuous, and void from the beginning, whether the relationship is legitimate or illegitimate.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2021 · leading case: People v. Tobias, 21 P.3d 758 (Cal. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Tobias, 21 P.3d 758 (Cal. 2001). · cites it 2× “) Family Code section 2200 defines marriages as incestuous and void if they are "between parents and children, ancestors and descendants of every degree, and between brothers and sisters of the half as well as the whole blood, and between uncles and nieces or aunts and nephews.”
Commonwealth v. Rahim, 805 N.E.2d 13 (Mass. 2004). “Penal Code § 285 (West 1999); Cal. Fam. Code § 2200 (West 1994); Fla. Stat.”
Smelt v. Cnty. of Orange, 447 F.3d 673 (9th Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “21 Cal. Fam. Code § 2200 . 22 We do not overlook Smelt and Hammer’s claim that this case touches on First Amendment issues, which should dissuade us from abstention.”
People v. Scott, 68 Cal. Rptr. 3d 592 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “(Fam. Code, § 2200; Pen. Code, § 285.) Thus, Penal Code section 285 serves the state’s legitimate interest in protecting against inbreeding, as well as its legitimate interests in protecting the integrity of the family unit and protecting persons who may not be in a position to…”
In Re Marriage Cases, 49 Cal. Rptr. 3d 675 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). “(Fam.Code, § 2200.) Bigamous and polygamous marriages are also illegal and void when entered.”
Welch v. State, 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8118 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “” Appellant does not claim she was a party to a void or voidable marriage, i.”
The People v. McEvoy, 215 Cal. App. 4th 431 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). “” Family Code section 2200 declares: “Marriages between parents and children, ancestors and descendants of every degree, and between brothers and sisters of the half as well as the whole blood, and between uncles and nieces or aunts and nephews, are incestuous, and void from the…”
In Re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008). · cites it 2× “[10] *871 In a footnote, the majority insists that, though same-sex couples are included within the fundamental constitutional right to marry, the state's absolute bans on marriages that are incestuous (Fam. Code, § 2200; see Pen. Code, § 285), or nonmonogamous (Pen.”
Latta v. Otter, 779 F.3d 902 (2015). “§ 32-206 (prohibiting marriages between first cousins), with Cal. Fam.Code § 2200 (permitting such marriages).”
Nijjar v. Nijjar CA5 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021). “Void, voidable, or invalid marriage The Family Code defines incestuous, bigamous, and polygamous marriages as void; it defines certain other marriages, such as those involving an underage party, a party of unsound mind, or a party whose consent was obtained by fraud, as voidable.”
Wynn v. Superior Court, 176 Cal. App. 4th 346 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). “, Fam. Code, § 2200 [marriage between certain blood relatives prohibited].”
People v. Tobias, 91 Cal. Rptr. 2d 396 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “" (Fam.Code, § 2200, emphasis added.) Family Code section 2200 establishes as a matter of statutory law that the relationship between a father and a daughter is within the degree of consanguinity specified in Penal Code section 285.”
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.