In Re Marriage of Smyklo

Appellant Alexander Smyklo (Husband) appeals from that portion of the final order filed on August 24, 1983, in which the superior court determined that he and respondent Margaret Smyklo (Wife) had “contracted a valid common law marriage under Alabama law in 1957 and that said common law marriage is entitled to be recognized in the State of California as a valid marriage under Civil Code section 4104. ” For the reasons stated below, this court affirms the judgment.

We consider appellant’s contentions in the order presented to us.

I. Contention: “The evidence presented at the time of trial failed to show that the parties had an actual and mutual agreement to enter into a matrimonial relationship, and thus the court’s finding of said agreement is in error.”

II. Contention: “The trial court’s finding of a common law marriage entered into between the parties based on credibility is in error.”

Husband’s assertions trigger the substantial evidence rule by which this court is bound.

“Evidence, to be ‘substantial’ must be of ‘ponderable legal significance . . . reasonable in nature, credible, and of solid value. ’ ” (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576 [ 162 Cal.Rptr.…