STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

) SS: CIVIL DIVISION, ROOM NO 12

COUNTY OF MARION ) CAUSE NO. 49D12-0903-DR-014654

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF:

TARA RANZY, Fth D

Petitioner,

and
c- 0 4 20
LARISSA CHISM, lotioRcun cost
catz
Respondent.

ORDER ON PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE

Come now the parties, Petitioner Tara Ranzy (hereinafter "Petitioner"), in person and by

counsel, and Larissa Chism (hereinafter "Respondent"), pro se, for hearing on August 28, 2009.

Upon receipt of testimony and having taken the matter under advisement, the Court finds and

orders as follows:

I. The Petitioner and Respondent are both female.

2. The parties were legally married in Toronto, Canada on January 21, 2005. The Canadian

province of Ontario formally recognized same sex marriage prior to the date the parties'

marriage was solemnized.

3. The parties seek to have their marriage recognized in Indiana for the sole purpose of

obtaining dissolution of said marriage.

4. To that end, the parties submitted to the Court a Verified Petition for Dissolution of

Marriage followed by a Verified Waiver of Final Hearing and Summary Decree of Dissolution
of Marriage.

5. The Court declined to approve the dissolution decree and set the matter for hearing.
6. The parties were residents of the State of Indiana for at least six (6) months prior to the

filing of the dissolution petition. It was not established whether the parties were residents of

Indiana at the time of their marriage in Canada.

7. The parties submit to the jurisdiction of the Marion Superior Court.

8. The parties have appeared for final hearing at least sixty (60) days after the date of filing

of the dissolution petition.

9. There were no children born of the marriage.

10. Petitioner and Respondent are not now pregnant.

11. Neither party is a member of the military.

12. There has been an irretrievable breakdown in the marriage and it should be dissolved.

13. There is no real property to divide.

14. The parties have previously divided their personal property.

15. There are no joint financial accounts or debts to divide.

16. The question presented is whether the Marion Superior Court may properly recognize, for

the purpose of granting a dissolution petition, the marriage of two persons of the same sex who

were legally married outside the State of Indiana.

17. A same sex marriage is prohibited in Indiana. See Morrison v. Sadler, 821 N.E.2d 15

(hid. Ct. App. 2005). Further, laj marriage between persons of the same gender is void in

Indiana even if the marriage is lawful in the place where it is solemnized." Ind. Code § 31-1 1-1-

1.

18. As the State of Indiana has chosen to prohibit same sex marriage as a matter of public

policy, it might logically follow that Indiana would have a policy interest in granting same sex

divorce. However, the General Assembly has not enacted a statute which confers upon the
courts the authority to dissolve same sex marriages in the same manner as marriages between a

man and a woman.

19. The Court is bound by the clear language of LC. § 31-11-1-1.

20. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and cannot giant the petition for dissolution.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Verified

Petition for Dissolution of Marriage is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the marriage between the parties is null and VOID.

ALL SO RECOMMENDED THIS 4th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009.

<-1/14/24nailivistaa
Jeffrey L. Marc al
Master Commissioner
Marion Superior Court
Civil Division, Room Twelve

SO ORDERED

Judge Heather Welch

Marion Superior Court
Civil Division, Room Twelve

Distribution:

Karen Jensen, Esq. Larissa Chism

922 Olive Street
Indianapolis, IN 46203