Happily ever after

Couple marries after 33 years together

By Laura Tonkyn, Journal staff | Saturday, October 18, 2008

Previous Page

Share

• del.icio.us
• Digg
• NewsVine
• Fark

Print

Email

The temperature on Andrew and Beverly Larvie’s wedding day was 103 degrees, making it the hottest day of the year. But that isn’t the most impressive number from the outdoor ceremony held near Mission on Aug. 2.

The wedding announcement published in the July 30 edition of the Todd County Tribune is something of a standout: “The children of Andrew M. ‘Butch’ Larvie Jr. and Beverly J. Redday are happy to announce that after 33 years their parents will FINALLY be married.”

“We had it out in back of the house,” Andrew Larvie said of the ceremony. “It was really toasty, but it was fun.”

The Larvies have lived on a small country place about three miles from Mission for most of their years together since deciding to join forces in 1975. Both previously married, Andrew was raising two girls and Beverly was the mother of five — three girls and two boys. In time, the two became parents of another boy and girl.

“The relationship just kept going,” Andrew said. “We were happy the way we were.”

Beverly has a little different take on the decision-making process: “I didn’t want to

jump into anything,” she joked. “I wanted to take my time.”

Through the years, Andrew and Beverly have had the ups and downs that come to every couple as time passes. “We’ve been through the hard times, raising his, mine and ours,” Beverly said. “We’ve had our fights, like everybody else, but we don’t let it go more than a day.”

“We never broke up, never separated,” Andrew said in describing their feelings for each other.

With such a strong bond over so many years, the idea of getting legally married wasn’t at the top of the list. “We always felt we were married,” Beverly said. “We talked about it, but that is all it ever was. Neither one of us pushed the other.”

Part of the reasoning was their understanding of South Dakota law. The couple believed people who lived together as man and wife for seven years became legally bound to each other through “common law.”

Over the past few years, the urge to officially tie the knot began to grow, but finding the time or the money slowed down the process.

“I wanted to just take off and get married,” Andrew said. Beverly wasn’t too taken with that idea, though. “Bev said we can’t because the kids will all be mad,” Andrew recalled.

But finally, the decision was made, much to the delight of the family, who “pushed us a little bit,” according to Andrew.

“Once they found out, they were, ‘You gotta tell us what you want us to do,’” Beverly said. With a total of six girls to divvy up the chores, Beverly and Andrew weren’t too stressed about wedding preparations.

“I decorated a little bit around the house, but they were the ones who did the flowers, the bowls, the candles,” Beverly said. “They had a busy week getting that all prepared.”

“We rented a tent from a guy in Mitchell who brought it down and set it up,” Andrew said.

On the day of the event, Beverly wore a purple silk top with slacks, coordinating with her wedding colors, which were all shades of lavender. Andrew sported a dressed-up Western look — jeans, shirt, cowboy hat and a vest.

“We have more friends than we thought we had,” Andrew said. “Lots of people showed up.” That included the nine children and many of their 34 grandchildren.

Along with the temperature, the wind came up on the big day, and the rented tent began to billow. “I asked the Lord to turn the fan down to low,” Andrew said, “and a half an hour later the wind died down and it was great.”

On a day about six weeks after their wedding, both enjoyed talking about being married and their feelings for each other.

“He’s a wonderful man,” Beverly said. “What the heck would I ever do without him?”

But it is taking a little time for Beverly to get used to her new last name. “Somebody calls me Mrs. Larvie, and I got to think for a while.”

Recently, Beverly completed the process of changing her drivers license, getting her voter registration switched and redoing her Social Security information.

Making sure that all the legalities are correct is also important to Andrew. “We’re getting older now, so it could have been a big old fight if something happened,” he said. “Now, each has rights.”

But that’s really not what it is all about in the end, Andrew said.

“Another reason is, she is kind of my best friend.”

Unmarried couples ‘don’t have any rights’

By Laura Tonkyn

Journal staff

You may be lovers, best friends and soul mates, but if you aren’t married, the most you are in the eyes of the law is business partners — and that’s only if you have documentation.

There are likely many couples who believe common-law marriage is legally recognized in the state of South Dakota. But unless you are celebrating almost 50 years or more as a couple, you have no legal status. That’s because, according to the South Dakota State Bar Association Web site, common-law marriage can be recognized only if the couple was married before July 1, 1959. And while the laws may differ in some respects on South Dakota’s reservations, unmarried couples are often in uncharted waters when it comes to their legal responsibilities to each other.

Frances Becker, an attorney specializing in estate planning and trusts at Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & LeBrun in Rapid City, puts the actual situation unmarried couples face bluntly: “First of all, you don’t have any rights.”

Those rights include the right to inherit. “A spouse is entitled to claim an elective share in addition to inheritance. You can’t disclaim or disinherit your spouse,” she said.

It’s not only what happens after a death that can make for difficulties. “There is little ability to buy insurance as a family or a couple,” Becker said, adding that other issues include Social Security and retirement plans. A partner has no right to pension money or annuities unless he or she is named specifically as a beneficiary.

People who have been together for years may think of each other’s blood relations as family and enjoy friendly or even loving relationships with the children, parents, brothers and sisters of their “significant other.” And they may be raising those children or helping support the parents. But if the relationship fails or a partner dies, those bonds may quickly dissolve.

“Family members usually say, ‘you are out,’ because they believe it would have been formalized if their family member wanted it,” Becker said. In a good number of cases, the relationship was not supported by the family in the first place.

“When a family is picking up the pieces, after they are burying their loved one, you are asking them to accept the relationship after death,” Becker said. “If it was not accepted before death, they are not likely to accept it after death.”

Of course, if a relationship goes sour and a couple splits up, the likelihood of arguments over assets and other belongings is great — and the losses can be substantial.

One such circumstance is how the equity in a home is distributed. Even if a partner has proof of making mortgage payments, if his or her name isn’t listed as an owner of the home, the home’s increase in value over the years will go only to the legal owner or the owner’s heirs.

 “If you don’t have documentation, you are limited to only recovering what you put into the property,” Becker said.

If a partner has contributed to paying a mortgage, paying for education or sharing the cost of a major purchase such as a car, unless there is documentation showing payment of such expenses or a legal contract, it will be “each person’s word against the other’s,” according to Becker. “The only way they are going to recover anything is to prove that they have made contributions. Quite frankly, there are a number of contracts that have to be in writing. If it is a contract that has to be in writing, you might not prevail.”

For couples that have had children together, there is an obligation to provide support. But, there will have to be proven paternity for the court to act, Becker said. And, she added, “Anytime you have multiple children with different parents, the potential for problems increases.”

The solution is simple, Becker said. “Formalizing the relationship makes it a non-issue.”

Of course, for many couples, that is easier to say than to do. “People don’t want to know what the issues are or they are in denial,” Becker said. Past traumatic relationships may cause people to shy away from making a legal commitment to one another, or “no rules” may be part of the allure. But it is not that couples must necessarily marry, Becker said. “You don’t have to marry to put property into joint tenancy. If there is some formalization of the relationship, at least in a business sense, there will be no problem.”

The one option that is most likely to lead to problems is the one too many couples choose – doing nothing. Or as Becker puts it: “With nothing, the surviving partner gets nothing.”

Contact Laura Tonkyn at 394-8405 or laura.tonkyn@rapidcityjournal.com.