Also known as: inter-conjuges · between spouses · interspousal
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An adverb and adjective denoting actions, communications, or relations occurring between a husband and wife. The phrase identifies matters arising exclusively from the marital relationship and often triggers specialized rules protecting confidentiality or governing property and immunity.
Ian Iverson told his wife Idina in their bedroom after the children slept that he had altered emissions data at work. When prosecutors subpoenaed Idina before a grand jury, she refused to disclose the statement. The court sustained the refusal because the communication occurred privately between spouses during marriage.
Isabelle Inman sued her husband Igor Ito for injuries sustained in a car accident that occurred while Igor was driving. Igor moved to dismiss under an out-of-state interspousal immunity rule. The court denied the motion because the forum state permitted tort actions between spouses.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Iris Irons sought an abortion without informing her husband Ian. State law required spousal notification before the procedure. The court struck down the requirement because it imposed an undue burden on the wife's liberty interest in deciding whether to bear a child.
Isabella Ingram reported her husband's illegal conduct at their shared workplace to authorities. Her employer fired her for the disclosure. The court held that the marital relationship did not shield the employer from liability for retaliatory discharge.
Ian Iverson was injured while riding as a passenger in a car driven by his wife Idina in another state. The forum court applied its own law allowing interspousal tort suits rather than the other state's immunity rule. The decision turned on the forum's stronger interest in compensating its resident.
Isabelle Inman and her husband Igor challenged a state statute criminalizing use of contraceptives by married couples. The court dismissed the suit for lack of justiciability because the statute had never been enforced against married persons.
Courts presume that private communications between spouses during marriage are confidential. The party seeking disclosure bears the burden of rebutting the presumption by showing the communication was not intended to remain secret.
The privilege protecting confidential communications made during marriage continues even after the marriage ends. Either former spouse may still assert it to block disclosure of those earlier exchanges.
The witness spouse alone holds the privilege against adverse testimony. The defendant spouse cannot prevent the witness from testifying voluntarily, though the communications privilege may still bar specific confidential statements.
…U. S., at 69. In our view, the spousal notice requirement is a rational attempt by the State to improve truthful communication between spouses and encourage collaborative decision making, and thereby fosters marital integrity. See Labine v. Vincent , 401 U. S. 532, 538 (1971) ("[T]he power to make rules to establish, protect,…