Mohammed Zawahiri v. Raghad Z. Alwattar

N/A

OUTCOME: Currently pending

Mr. Zawahiri filed a complaint for divorce on the grounds of incompatibility. Ms. Alwattar subsequently cross-complained for divorce, also citing incompatibility, and, inter alia, seeking enforcement o ... f a religiously-mandated dower ("mahr") term found in the couple's marriage contract. After a two-day trial held on August 2 and 6, 2007, the trial court issued a divorce decree filed October 10, 2007. The court granted the couple a divorce but declined to compel the mahr payment. The trial court held Mr. Zawahiri “clearly agreed to undertake the duty to pay the mahr when he signed the Islamic marriage contract.” Still, while acknowledging that the requirement to pay money seems less like a religious act than participation in a religious ceremony, the court below held, without citing any legal authority, the obligation to pay the postponed mahr term is rooted in a religious practice and is therefore a religious act. Accordingly, in the view of the trial court, the mahr violates the Ohio constitution. The court so held despite case law from several other jurisdictions upholding mahr provisions under very similar factual circumstances, on the apparent rationale that no similar holding could be found in Ohio. Instead, the court simply analogized the postponed mahr term to a Get in the Jewish tradition, finding enforcement of the mahr provision would result in unconstitutional entanglement with religion. In addition, the Decree found the mahr term fails to meet the heightened standards for Ohio antenuptial agreements. Ms. Alwattar now appeals the trial court’s decision regarding the enforceability of the mahr provision.