Coverage note: this corpus holds the
consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check
palegis.us.
§ 1702. Marriage during existence of former marriage.
(a) General rule.--If a married person, during the lifetime of the other person with whom the marriage
is in force, enters into a subsequent marriage pursuant to the requirements of this
part and the parties to the marriage live together thereafter as husband and wife,
and the subsequent marriage was entered into by one or both of the parties in good
faith in the full belief that the former spouse was dead or that the former marriage
has been annulled or terminated by a divorce, or without knowledge of the former marriage,
they shall, after the impediment to their marriage has been removed by the death of
the other party to the former marriage or by annulment or divorce, if they continue
to live together as husband and wife in good faith on the part of one of them, be
held to have been legally married from and immediately after the date of death or
the date of the decree of annulment or divorce.
(b) False rumor of death of spouse.--Where a remarriage has occurred upon false rumor of the death of a former spouse in
appearance well-founded but there has been no decree of presumed death, the remarriage
shall be void and subject to annulment by either party to the remarriage as provided
by section 3304 (relating to grounds for annulment of void marriages), and the returning
spouse shall have cause for divorce as provided in section 3301 (relating to grounds
for divorce).
(c) Criminal penalties.--Where the remarriage was entered into in good faith, neither party to the remarriage
shall be subject to criminal prosecution for bigamy.
Notes of Decisions
Est. of Sacchetti v. Appeal of Sacchetti, 128 A.3d 273 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 3× “Kai when she married Mario, her marriage to Mario became valid under 23 Pa.C.S. § 1702(a), set forth infra, following her February 1,6, 2011 divorce from Mr.”
Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. Calabro, 312 F. Supp. 2d 697 (E.D. Pa. 2004).
· cites it 2× “An otherwise valid marriage can be cured under 23 Pa.C.S. § 1702(a) after the impediment to marriage is removed, only if the marriage is entered into in good faith without knowledge of the impediment.”
Covington v. Covington, 617 A.2d 1318 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
“In finding the removal of an unknown impediment made the parties’ marriage valid, the court relied upon 23 Pa.C.S. § 1702(a), which states as follows: § 1702.”
Bordone, R. v. Bordone, V., 2025 Pa. Super. 205 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“at 11 (citing 23 Pa.C.S.§ 1702(a)). Husband’s contention that Connecticut law should apply because the marriage occurred there is meritless.”
Ecker v. Ecker, 36 Pa. D. & C.4th 104 (1997).
· cites it 2× “See 23 Pa.C.S. §1702. Section 1702 provides that if a married person enters into a subsequent mar *114 riage, the parties to that marriage live together as husband and wife, and the subsequent marriage was entered into by one or both of the parties in a good faith belief that…”
Huff v. US Off. of Pers. Mgmt (3rd Cir. 1994).
“1946) (Texas law presumes validity of second marriage and that presumption prevails until it is rebutted "by evidence which negatives the effective operation of every possible means by which a dissolution of the prior marriage could have taken place"); see also 23 Pa. Cons.…”
— 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1702(a) — 4 cases
Est. of Sacchetti v. Appeal of Sacchetti, 128 A.3d 273 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“Kai when she married Mario, her marriage to Mario became valid under 23 Pa.C.S. § 1702(a), set forth infra, following her February 1,6, 2011 divorce from Mr.”
Covington v. Covington, 617 A.2d 1318 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
“In finding the removal of an unknown impediment made the parties’ marriage valid, the court relied upon 23 Pa.C.S. § 1702(a), which states as follows: § 1702.”
Bordone, R. v. Bordone, V., 2025 Pa. Super. 205 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“at 11 (citing 23 Pa.C.S.§ 1702(a)). Husband’s contention that Connecticut law should apply because the marriage occurred there is meritless.”
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.