Definition
In law, meretricious describes a relationship or union involving unlawful sexual connection — most commonly applied to a purported marriage that is void from the outset because one or both parties lacked the legal capacity to marry. A meretricious relationship is not merely irregular or voidable; it is one that the law refuses to recognize as a valid union, typically because of a pre-existing impediment such as a prior undissolved marriage, prohibited consanguinity, or age incapacity.
In modern usage, particularly in community property jurisdictions, the term has extended beyond void marriages to describe long-term cohabitation relationships between unmarried persons — what courts in some states now call a "meretricious relationship" to distinguish it from formal marriage while still addressing equitable claims arising from the shared domestic arrangement.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Tastelessly gaudy; superficially attractive but having in reality no value or substance; falsely alluring. Also, involving unlawful sexual connection, or relating to prostitutes or prostitution.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Of or pertaining to prostitutes; having to do with harlots; lustful. Also: resembling the arts of a harlot; alluring by false show; gaudily and deceitfully ornamental; tawdry.
The gap here is significant in two directions. In ordinary English, meretricious most commonly means flashy or showy in a deceptive, tasteless way — a meaning entirely disconnected from its legal use. A researcher encountering the word in a judicial opinion or historical document must not carry over this aesthetic meaning. Conversely, the older common meaning rooted in prostitution and unlawful sexual connection is closer to the legal meaning — but the legal term does not require commercial sex; it applies broadly to any union the law refuses to sanction.
Common Confusion
Meretricious is sometimes confused with void and voidable as interchangeable descriptors of invalid marriages, but the term carries a specific moral and legal valence that void and voidable do not. A marriage may be voidable — capable of being ratified or confirmed — without being meretricious. The meretricious label attaches to unions that are void ab initio, not merely defective. Researchers should also take care not to conflate the older usage (specifically referencing prostitution or illicit sex generally) with the more technically precise modern legal usage focused on capacity-based invalidity of marital unions or cohabitation relationships with property consequences.
Why It Matters in Research
This term presents a layered research trap because its meaning has traveled across three distinct registers — moral/pejorative, narrowly doctrinal, and modern equitable — and legal sources from different periods may be using it in any of these ways.
In historical sources through the nineteenth century, meretricious often carries strong moral condemnation derived from the prostitution-adjacent common meaning. Treatises and opinions of that era may use the term loosely to describe any illicit sexual relationship, not only void marriages. Researchers reading older digests, equity opinions, or domestic relations treatises should not assume the term is operating in the precise modern sense.
In the mid-to-late twentieth century, the term took on new legal significance in Washington State and several other community property or equitable distribution jurisdictions, where courts developed doctrine around "meretricious relationships" — stable, committed cohabitation between unmarried persons — for purposes of dividing property acquired during the relationship. This usage is almost entirely jurisdictionally specific; it does not appear with the same doctrinal force in common law property states, where cohabitation claims are more likely to be framed in contract (palimony) or unjust enrichment terms. A researcher expecting uniformity across jurisdictions will find significant divergence.
Within the Law Mind corpus, the term appears in family law materials, equity treatises, and property doctrine and may require contextual triangulation to determine which register is operative in a given source.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (both the first and second editions) and Bouvier's Law Dictionary are in close agreement on the core definition: meretricious describes the nature of unlawful sexual connection, and specifically characterizes a void marriage — one contracted by persons under legal disability. All three sources cite Blackstone's Commentaries (1 Bl. Comm. 436) as authority, reflecting how thoroughly the term's legal meaning in the Anglo-American tradition derives from Blackstone's treatment of void marriages.
What the historical dictionaries do not address is the modern equitable extension of the term to unmarried cohabitation relationships outside the void-marriage context. This is expected, as that doctrine developed primarily in the latter half of the twentieth century — well after these editions were current. Researchers relying solely on these historical sources will have an accurate picture of the term's classical application but will miss its doctrinal evolution in family and property law.
Bouvier's entry also contains an unrelated passage on merger of estates, which appears to be a printing artifact and has no bearing on the definition of meretricious.
Jurisdictional Note
Washington State courts have developed a distinct body of law around "meretricious relationships," applying equitable principles to divide property acquired during stable, marriage-like cohabitation between unmarried adults. This doctrine has no direct counterpart in most common law property states, where similar claims typically proceed under contract or restitution theories. Researchers working in community property jurisdictions should check whether local courts have adopted analogous doctrine.