1. Anita Spooner on March 28, 2006 11:34 AM writes...

Hi Dave -

I'm really sorry that I haven't been posting for a while, but you know how it is with the kids and all! So I saw this story up there and at first I thought it was kind of funny that this fellow wanted to go on a date even though he wasn't single.

I started thinking about it though and thought about my sister. She's always looking for a man as I think I've made pretty clear, and I know that she'd feel pretty bad if she ended up meeting a fella that was married. That wouldn't be too fun for her!

Then I saw what you wrote and I thought, he's got a point! I wondered about the term married just like you - and separated too - so I went onto google.com to see what it said. Well, I found this site and here's what it said about legal separation in California - a legal separation does not end a marriage or domestic partnership. You can't marry or enter into a partnership with someone else if you are legally separated (and not divorced).

I also looked up about it for Oklahoma (where I am from) and it said - A legal separation is not a divorce in Oklahoma. It can be filed by a married person who wishes to maintain the marriage but physically separate and try to resolve any problems in the marriage.

This made it sound like to me that this guy is still married (even though he is separated) until he gets a divorce but I don't know. It is all so confusing to me.

I feel bad for him. It sounds like his is probably a nice guy and once he isn't married I'll bet he'll be a fine catch for some lucky lady!

Careinly,

Anita Spooner

2. Fred on March 28, 2006 8:45 PM writes...

In every jurisdiction that I have researched, including the one where I got my divorce, one is married until the court issues a divorce judgement.

I have no doubt that the guy's intentions were good, but he jumped the gun by two months, and in doing so he did violate the terms of service. And in my opinion it is improper of him to expect eHarmony to compensate for his error.

3. Scott on March 28, 2006 9:54 PM writes...

My understanding is that no US state recognizes separation legally. Until the divorce decree is signed, you're married. I think Canada does legally recognize a state of Separation.

4. astounded on March 28, 2006 11:52 PM writes...

Dude, you can't be "legally separated" unless you are MARRIED. Where is the amiguity here?

This lawyer suing eHarmony is a boob, and props the eHarmony for keeping idiots like him from wasting my time.

5. John on March 31, 2006 1:59 PM writes...

Sorry (for not doing any research into the author's background), but I would assume that Dave must be (a) very young and/or (b) from the west coast.

You are either single, married, or widowed. There are no other options. Seperated, whether legally or not, is only a state of marriage.

Because society no longer respects marriage, it's no surprise this lawsuit came up.

And if the Supreme Court can't/won't define marriage, how is eHarmony supposed to do it?

6. relaxedguy on March 31, 2006 3:29 PM writes...

My point was the eHarmony should have done as good a job explaining the criteria for joining their site as they did explaining about other legal and financial aspects of belonging to the site. And where is the no gays aloud verbiage?

7. Mike on April 3, 2006 1:31 PM writes...

Speaking as a former user of eHarmony, I'd have to say that they did this guy a favor by telling him to wait. Had they accepted him as a separated but still married individual, he would have gotten a total of zero matches until he changed to divorced.

One of the choices you had to make as a user was about potential matches' relationship status. You could choose to include

single, never married
widowed
divorced, without kids
divorced, with kids

Since this lawyer wouldn't fit into any of these catagories, even those who had checked all of these types as acceptable still wouldn't get matched with him. The site simply has not been set up to deal with "married, but separated" types.

By telling him he couldn't join, eHarmony was saving him from throwing away the membership fee on zero matches. And he was free to try the large number of other sites out there that would accept him.

And I'm sorry, but I don't feel bad about him spending two hours on a personality profile. He's a lawyer, and yet he claims he was confused as to his marital status?? Besides, that two hours he spent is totally wasted...he still got to see the results of his personality profile, and if/when his divorce is actually final, he can go back and not have to do it again.

8. Gooch on April 24, 2006 7:05 PM writes...

I agree. A lawyer confounding lightweight marriage-related legalese? Right. Only an affluent society can produce affluent men capable of requesting large monetary awards for suffering the loss of two hours of luxury.