Section 2.7 Fraud

• Library: Family Law Deskbook and 2014 Supp

2. (§2.7) Fraud

If one party is induced into the marriage by the fraudulent misrepresentations of the other party, the consent requirement has not been fully met, but the marriage is invalid only if the fraud goes to the “essential[s]” of the marriage relation. See Watson v. Watson, 143 S.W.2d 349 (Mo. App. E.D. 1940) (granting an annulment because the defendant fraudulently misrepresented before marriage that she did not have syphilis). Furthermore, the person asserting the fraud has the burden of proving it by clear and convincing evidence. Id. A more recent case that points out the “essential” nature of the sexual relations within the marital community is Kshaiboon v. Kshaiboon, 652 S.W.2d 219 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983), in which an annulment was granted because the husband lacked the physical or mental capability to engage in a normal sexual relationship and his only sexual activities with his wife were of an unnatural type. The husband also misrepresented his interest in having children, another essential element of marriage.

A marriage induced by fraud is voidable, not void, and can be attacked only by the defrauded party and only if that party has not ratified the marriage after discovering the fraud. See Jordan v. Mo. & Kan. Tel. Co., 116 S.W. 432 (Mo. App. W.D. 1909). Other instances of fraud have been held to be one spouse’s entering into a marriage without love for the other, Rankin v. Rankin, 17 S.W.2d 381
...