I am probably snowed in for another day. I am bored. Dangerous condition, I have too much time to think weird thoughts, leading to a legal question.
When i married I acquired brothers and sisters-in law. As time went on I added sons and daughters -in-law.
What is the law? What legal duties do we have for each other? Or is this another example of something like The Law of unintended consequences, a law administered and enforced by the universe as it is, not as we want,
But really, is there statutory attention to this condition?
snailgate.
question for the Juris doctors here.
-
Burning Petard
- Posts: 4638
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
- Location: Near Bear, Delaware
- Sue U
- Posts: 9143
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
- Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)
Re: question for the Juris doctors here.
Not a question for JDs, but for DDs, as the term originates in ecclesiastical or "canon" law. It was originally used to define classes of persons prohibited by the church from marrying and dictating transfers/inheritance of property, later used more commonly (in English, anyway) to describe non-blood familial relations/status. I don't "do" family law, but as far as I know there are no actual secular legal rights or obligations that are dependent on "in-law" status; Big RR would know better than I do, though.Burning Petard wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 2:54 pmI am probably snowed in for another day. I am bored. Dangerous condition, I have too much time to think weird thoughts, leading to a legal question.
When i married I acquired brothers and sisters-in law. As time went on I added sons and daughters -in-law.
What is the law? What legal duties do we have for each other? Or is this another example of something like The Law of unintended consequences, a law administered and enforced by the universe as it is, not as we want,
But really, is there statutory attention to this condition?
snailgate.
GAH!
Re: question for the Juris doctors here.
I agree with what Sue said; the "in law" originated in canon law, and no statutory or common law applies to in law relations. Maybe in other countries, but i am not sure.
-
Burning Petard
- Posts: 4638
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
- Location: Near Bear, Delaware
Re: question for the Juris doctors here.
Thank you. That sort of goes to my observation that almost nobody in the USofA practices their religion religiously ()my dictionary has for definition 2 • with consistent and conscientious regularity
snailgate.
.
snailgate.
.
- Sue U
- Posts: 9143
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
- Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)
Re: question for the Juris doctors here.
Why, are you planning to marry your sister/daughter-in-law?Burning Petard wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 6:21 pmThank you. That sort of goes to my observation that almost nobody in the USofA practices their religion religiously ()my dictionary has for definition 2 • with consistent and conscientious regularity
snailgate.
.
GAH!
-
Burning Petard
- Posts: 4638
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
- Location: Near Bear, Delaware
Re: question for the Juris doctors here.
No, I was wondering if my daughter-in-law could sue me for support or abandonment
snailgate.
snailgate.