Ross v. Goldstein, 203 S.W.3d 508 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
Son, as the independent administrator of Father’s estate, brought
suit against Partner to recover estate assets. Partner argued that the
court should adopt the marriage-like relationship doctrine so that he
could claim the assets. Both the trial and appellate court rejected
Partner’s claim and refused to recognize this doctrine. Partner asserted
that the doctrine is an equitable remedy which is not against the public
policy of Texas and that it would “aid the courts in addressing the
growing reality of same-sex relationships.” Ross at 514. The appellate
court explained that it was unwilling to recognize the marriage-like
relationship doctrine and that “same-sex couples must address their
particular desires through other legal vehicles such as contracts or
testamentary transfers.” Id.
The court examined two provisions of Texas law; first, Article 1, § 32
of the Texas Constitution which provides that no state or political
subdivision may create or recognize any legal status identical or
similar to marriage for same-sex partners and second, Texas Family Code
§ 6.204 which states that it is contrary to Texas public policy to
recognize or give effect to a same-sex marriage or civil union.
Accordingly, the court held that it lacked the power to create an
equitable remedy akin to marriage.
Moral: Texas does not recognize the marriage-like relationship doctrine
and thus unmarried partners must use other legal techniques to achieve
their estate planning desires.