Littleton v. Prange explained

Littleton v. Prange
Court:Fourth Court of Appeals of Texas
Full Name:Christie Lee LITTLETON, Individually and as Next Heir of Jonathon Mark Littleton, Appellant, v. Dr. Mark PRANGE, Appellee.
Decision By:Phil Hardberger
Italic Title:yes

Littleton v. Prange, 9 S.W.3d 223 (1999), is a 1999 lawsuit that voided a marriage where one of the individuals was a transgender woman, Christie Lee Littleton. The Fourth Court of Appeals of Texas ruled that, for purposes of Texas law, Littleton is male, and that her marriage to a man was therefore invalid. Texas law did not recognize same-sex marriage at the time of the ruling.[1] [2]

Background

Christie Lee Cavazos was assigned male at birth, in San Antonio, Texas in 1952. She dropped out of school at age 15 and began living as a woman. In 1977, Cavazos began taking female hormones and legally changed her first name. In 1980, she underwent surgical reassignment and had the requisite state-issued identification changed to female.[3] In 1989 Cavazos married Jonathan Mark Littleton in Kentucky, later moving to San Antonio.

Case

After Jonathan Littleton's death, Christie Littleton brought a medical malpractice suit against her husband's doctor, Mark Prange.[4] The defense attorney argued that the marriage was invalid because Christie was a biological male. On appeal, Chief Justice Phil Hardberger relied on the fact that "Texas statutes do not allow same-sex marriages" and that "male chromosomes do not change with either hormonal treatment or sex reassignment surgery" in handing down his judgment that "Christie Littleton is a male. As a male, Christie cannot be married to another male. Her marriage to Jonathan was invalid, and she cannot bring a cause of action as his surviving spouse."[5]

The decision made it legal for a cis woman to marry a trans woman who had undergone sex reassignment surgery and transitioned to female as long as the two partners were assigned opposite sexes at birth.[6] [7]

In fiction

Littleton v. Prange is cited in the fictional 2010 Drop Dead Diva episode "Queen of Mean". In the episode, lawyers for a post-operative trans woman cite the case to prove that her marriage to a cis woman, entered into before she transitioned, was valid, allowing her to inherit her deceased wife's estate.[8]

See also

External links

Notes and References

  1. Book: Engel. David. McCann. Michael. Fault Lines: Tort Law as Cultural Practice. November 17, 2012. 2009-04-24. Stanford University Press. 9780804771207. 149–.
  2. Littleton v. Prange, No. 99-1214 (Tex. May 18, 2000)
  3. Celia Kitzinger & Sue Wilkinson (2006). Genders, sexualities and equal marriage rights. Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review
  4. Dahir, Mubarak (October 10, 2000). Genetics vs. love. The Advocate
  5. Web site: Littleton v. Prange, 9 SW3d 223 . October 30, 2010 . April 4, 2013 . https://web.archive.org/web/20130404050358/http://christielee.net/crtdec2.htm . dead .
  6. Pesquera, Adolfo (September 7, 2000). Lesbian couple get license to wed Transsexual ruling clears the way. San Antonio Express-News
  7. News: Abbott declines transgender marriage question. Lindell. Chuck. August 10, 2010. Austin American-Statesman. November 17, 2012. dead. https://web.archive.org/web/20110716134641/http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/abbott-declines-transgender-marriage-question-852534.html. July 16, 2011. mdy-all.
  8. Queen of Mean . Drop Dead Diva . 27:39 . Littleton held that legally, gender is determined by which box is marked on the birth certificate, right? ... If the birth certificate is controlling, your client was legally married..