New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 2C:24-1 (2026)

Bigamy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

a. Bigamy. A married person is guilty of bigamy, a disorderly persons offense, if he contracts or purports to contract another marriage, unless at the time of the subsequent marriage:

(1) The actor believes that the prior spouse is dead;

(2) The actor and the prior spouse have been living apart for 5 consecutive years throughout which the prior spouse was not known by the actor to be alive;

(3) A court has entered a judgment purporting to terminate or annul any prior disqualifying marriage, and the actor does not know that judgment to be invalid; or

(4) The actor reasonably believes that he is legally eligible to remarry.

b. Other party to bigamous marriage. A person is guilty of bigamy if he contracts or purports to contract marriage with another knowing that the other is thereby committing bigamy.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1999–2018 · leading case: Estes v. State, 546 S.W.3d 691 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018).
Estes v. State, 546 S.W.3d 691 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). “§ 13-3606 (1978); N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:24-1 (1978) ; Ala. Code § 13A-13-1 (1977) ; Neb.”
Lewis v. Harris, 908 A.2d 196 (N.J. 2006). “Thus, we are concerned only with the question of whether the right to same-sex marriage is deeply rooted in this State's history and its people's collective conscience.”
Leiva v. Sec'y of Dep't of Homeland Sec., 230 F. Supp. 3d 406 (D.N.J. 2017). · cites it 2× “” N.J.S.A. § 2C:24-1. C. Good Moral Character 78.”
Prevard v. Fauver, 47 F. Supp. 2d 539 (D.N.J. 1999). “or N.J.S.A. 2C:24-1. et seq., which became effective on September 1,1979.”
State v. Michael Sumulikoski / State v. Artur Sopel (072957) (N.J. 2015). “Under N.J.S.A. 2C:24-1(a), “[a] married person is guilty of bigamy .”
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:24-1(a) — 1 case
State v. Michael Sumulikoski / State v. Artur Sopel (072957) (N.J. 2015). “Under N.J.S.A. 2C:24-1(a), “[a] married person is guilty of bigamy .”
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.