In this will dispute, a jury determined that Darryl Arnold was the common law husband of Barbara J. Love by virtue of a marriage entered into prior to January 1, 1997,1 and remained so until the time of her death. Bertrand Love, the decedent’s son, appeals the judgment entered on the verdict. In addition to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, Love argues that the trial court committed several errors by: 1 admitting certain medical records; 2 refusing to charge the jury that a common law marriage may not be partial or periodic; 3 denying appellant’s motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding the relationship between Arnold and the decedent after January 1, 1997; 4 refusing to permit a rebuttal witness to testify; and 5 allowing Arnold’s counsel to question the appellant about his criminal history. For the reasons stated below, we affirm. “If there is any evidence to support the finding of a common law marriage, an appellate court should so construe the evidence to uphold the verdict.”2 So construed, the evidence shows that Arnold and the decedent met in or about 1991. Arnold testified that the decedent was widowed when they met and that he was divorced; that they moved in together in 1992; that they operated the decedent’s business together; that they had a sexual relationship and shared a bedroom; that in August 1994, they entered an agreement to be married and the decedent accepted a ring from him; and that she wore the ring daily until her last hospitalization. Arnold introduced several pictures of the decedent wearing the ring, and recalled that two of them were taken in 1996 and 1997, respectively. Arnold also testified that he gave the decedent greeting cards, which referred to her as his wife.
Arnold and the decedent opened a joint checking account on July 17, 1998, obtained certificates of deposit in 1998, and opened additional accounts at a different financial institution in 2002. They shared household expenses, and both contributed monies to the joint accounts. They also opened separate IRAs, designating each other as sole beneficiaries. Arnold explained that they did not indicate that they were married on the IRAs because they did not have the legal documentation to that effect, which was the same reason that they did not file joint tax returns. The beneficiary designations remained unchanged at the decedent’s death.
