The Ruffin/Women Last Name

[Queenie]

Okay board please don't killed me.. I have a question:

Besides the children, who is legal to carry the Ruffin' s name?

I am speaking in terms of the women. Besides me who can go to the Supreme Court and say I am Mrs. David E. Ruffin’s wife.


Let me start with Sandra because she was his first wife.. I think... Sandra and David were legally married before David became a tempt but someone told me he was separated from her in 1964 living with his brother Jimmy. My question is why both parties (David and Sandra) did not resolve the marriage considering they were living apart. Not trying to put the blame on Sandra but David spent majority of his time on the road therefore a divorce was the last thing on his mind. Once the divorce was final why Sandra did not go back to her maiden name. Is it because she wants the other women in David's life to always know their place?

Moving on to Gena... we talked about this in a previous thread ("Open Can of Worms") in which I am still confused about this oh well let me ask my question. Gena consider herself a common law wife therefore she is entitle to the Ruffin's name( by the way what state grant this pathetic gesture?) Her reason for carrying the Ruffin name is more like a status symbol than money JR is old enough to take care of himself. I think she wants to relived the 60's 70's and 80's era and by having the last name she can entertain new fans like myself with what was it like being with David.

This is my .64 cents opinion I think no one other than the children should be call Ruffins because of the simple fact it cause too much pain to the other women. If I was dating David, the last thing I want to be reminded David has women who are sharing his last name. Each woman had a special space in David's heart and they don't need to be reminded of his devotion to the other women.

Two women are claiming to the Ruffin's last name is that legal?

If for some reasons, the Gordys paid David' estate his money who is entitle to the windfall?? How much influence will Sandra and Gena have in determining who gets what if any...

[Joy]

Actually my thought is this. When you are going through the final stages of a divorce, you can decide then, if you want your maiden name or keep the husband name. If like in Sandra case, you have children I would think it would be feasible to keep the same name as your children, especially for any assistance you may need for raising them, or schooling, healthcare, etc. As for genna, I don’t believe she has ever lived with Ruffin long enough to be considered common law marriage. In most States you would have to live with that person for at least 8 to 10 years. And after reading her book, it didn’t appear that they did. David, I don’t believe ever stayed in one place too long. genna went to the courts to get her name changed AFTER David’s death. As far as I am concerned, her Last name is meaningless. Heck you and I could do that. It entitles her to nothing, as it would us. Since there was never a paternity test done on jr. He is entitled to nothing. Unless David’s daughters, decide to give him something. So to answer your question, I believe his children, and any of his ex-wives (LEGALLY that was married to him) could keep his name if they choose too. If I were a child of his-genna WOULD NOT have been able to get his last name.

[Queenie]

Joy said:

Actually my thought is this. When you are going through the final stages of a divorce, you can decide then, if you want your maiden name or keep the husband name. If like in Sandra case, you have children I would think it would be feasible to keep the same name as your children, especially for any assistance you may need for raising them, or schooling, healthcare, etc. As for genna, I don’t believe she has ever lived with Ruffin long enough to be considered common law marriage. In most States you would have to live with that person for at least 8 to 10 years. And after reading her book, it didn’t appear that they did. David, I don’t believe ever stayed in one place too long. genna went to the courts to get her name changed AFTER David’s death. As far as I am concerned, her Last name is meaningless. Heck you and I could do that. It entitles her to nothing, as it would us. Since there was never a paternity test done on jr. He is entitled to nothing. Unless David’s daughters, decide to give him something. So to answer your question, I believe his children, and any of his ex-wives (LEGALLY that was married to him) could keep his name if they choose too. If I were a child of his-genna WOULD NOT have been able to get his last name.

NO one ask you for your thoughts.... Do I need to go get your blood pressure medicine? No in reality thanks for your thoughts little Sister.

Bee gave me some of her ginsing and my mind is mess up.. I just have a different opinion.. on this subject.

[Queenie]

molly said:

I am reluctant to even respond to this thread. Only because of what has happened in terms of chaois and conflict when these subjects have been discussed in other threads. Sandra and Joy were both legally married to Ruffin. Therefore they both are entitled to keep the name Ruffin. Joy has remarried a couple of times or so I was told. Ruffin is Sandra's legal last name,divorce or not. I'm sure her decision to keep her name had absolutely nothing to do with any other women. Sandra was not a secret. The women that came during and after her marriage to Ruffin knew her to be his wife. We all know how genna got the last name Ruffin,and that is all I will say regarding her or her name change. If their would be any type of "Miracle" windfall from Motown Ruffin's legal heirs would be the beneficiaries of that windfall.

Thanks Mrs. Molly for your honesty. If I say something out of line, I know you and others will straighten me out. Since I did not live through what you saw on a personal level, all I can do is speculate.

[molly]

QueenNDF said:

Thanks Mrs. Molly for your honesty. If I say something out of line, I know you and others will straighten me out. Since I did not live through what you saw on a personal level, all I can do is speculate.

QNew, you haven't said anything out of line. You bring up very good questions that lend themselves to lively discussions. Noting wrong with that,since this is a discussion board.

[der68]

QNDF I agree pretty much with what Molly said. I also have to agree with Joy regarding genna's name change after David' death. A name change without the benefit of marriage entitles you to Nothing. genna has no legal standing what so ever. My understanding is David's daughters would be considered his legal heirs. Small thing but worth being repeated. David's legal name was Davis Eli Ruffin.

[Queenie]

Joy said:

Actually my thought is this. When you are going through the final stages of a divorce, you can decide then, if you want your maiden name or keep the husband name. If like in Sandra case, you have children I would think it would be feasible to keep the same name as your children, especially for any assistance you may need for raising them, or schooling, healthcare, etc. As for genna, I don’t believe she has ever lived with Ruffin long enough to be considered common law marriage. In most States you would have to live with that person for at least 8 to 10 years. And after reading her book, it didn’t appear that they did. David, I don’t believe ever stayed in one place too long. genna went to the courts to get her name changed AFTER David’s death. As far as I am concerned, her Last name is meaningless. Heck you and I could do that. It entitles her to nothing, as it would us. Since there was never a paternity test done on jr. He is entitled to nothing. Unless David’s daughters, decide to give him something. So to answer your question, I believe his children, and any of his ex-wives (LEGALLY that was married to him) could keep his name if they choose too. If I were a child of his-genna WOULD NOT have been able to get his last name.

Joy why do you have to talk about folks!!! Jr.. was accepted by Mr. David E. Ruffin therefore it is alright with us...Nope little sister... it is not alright... he is entitle the big pie in the sky just like the other children..

Let me get this straight lil sister if I was David's child no doing of mine regardless if mommy and daddy were together I get nothing a big 0...

Girl, I take your butt to court so fast your little head will be spinning.. And by the way, that was not the question at all..read the thread again before you make a comment..also leave children out of this one thing they are not responsible for grown folks's actions.

By the way, Baby Joy why are you commenting on this thread this is for grown folks such as Common, Der, Mrs Molly, Jody, Evita, Bee, Michelle, and the new members.

I don't need your 2 cents in this conversation... Don't you have some study to do...

[Queenie]

der68 said:

QNDF I agree pretty much with what Molly said. I also have to agree with Joy regarding genna's name change after David' death. A name change without the benefit of marriage entitles you to Nothing. genna has no legal standing what so ever. My understanding is David's daughters would be considered his legal heirs. Small thing but worth being repeated. David's legal name was Davis Eli Ruffin.

Thanks Der68... now I know Genna gets nothing what about son..

Since Mrs. you know who Joy always have to bring him up. One question is all the children entitle to some of David's windfall...

[der68]

QueenNDF said:

Thanks Der68... now I know Genna gets nothing what about son..

Since Mrs. you know who Joy always have to bring him up. One question is all the children entitle to some of David's windfall...

Morally??? I would say yes. Legally??? NOPE! Jr. and Kelly are not considered his legal heirs. Do I feel they both should share in David's estate? I do. The girls did allow Jr. to share in David's royalties.

[Queenie]

der68 said:

Morally??? I would say yes. Legally??? NOPE! Jr. and Kelly are not considered his legal heirs. Do I feel they both should share in David's estate? I do. The girls did allow Jr. to share in David's royalties.

So the courts only reconized 3 children.. If I am hearing you correctly if BG get into a good mood and give David's estate his riches the only ones can step in the court room is the three children of Sandra and David.??

[Joda]

QueenNDF said:

Okay board please don't killed me.. I have a question:

Besides the children, who is legal to carry the Ruffin' s name?

I am speaking in terms of the women. Besides me who can go to the Supreme Court and say I am Mrs. David E. Ruffin’s wife.


Let me start with Sandra because she was his first wife.. I think... Sandra and David were legally married before David became a tempt but someone told me he was separated from her in 1964 living with his brother Jimmy. My question is why both parties (David and Sandra) did not resolve the marriage considering they were living apart. Not trying to put the blame on Sandra but David spent majority of his time on the road therefore a divorce was the last thing on his mind. Once the divorce was final why Sandra did not go back to her maiden name. Is it because she wants the other women in David's life to always know their place?

Moving on to Gena... we talked about this in a previous thread ("Open Can of Worms") in which I am still confused about this oh well let me ask my question. Gena consider herself a common law wife therefore she is entitle to the Ruffin's name( by the way what state grant this pathetic gesture?) Her reason for carrying the Ruffin name is more like a status symbol than money JR is old enough to take care of himself. I think she wants to relived the 60's 70's and 80's era and by having the last name she can entertain new fans like myself with what was it like being with David.

This is my .64 cents opinion I think no one other than the children should be call Ruffins because of the simple fact it cause too much pain to the other women. If I was dating David, the last thing I want to be reminded David has women who are sharing his last name. Each woman had a special space in David's heart and they don't need to be reminded of his devotion to the other women.

Two women are claiming to the Ruffin's last name is that legal?

If for some reasons, the Gordys paid David' estate his money who is entitle to the windfall?? How much inflAscertain if the state/country you are living in recognizes common law marriages.
There are four requirements for a valid common law marriage. Just living together isn't enough to validate a common law marriage.
You must live together.
You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.
Although not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.
You must intend to be married.
In the U.S., every state is Constitutionally required to recognize as valid a common-law marriage that was recognized in another state.

Tips:

Common law marriages are recognized by: Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Washington, D.C.
Some of these have restrictions and only recognize common law marriages performed by a certain date: Georgia, January 1, 1997; Idaho, January 1, 1996; Ohio, October 10, 1991.
New Hampshire only recognizes common law marriages for probate purposes.



uence will Sandra and Gena have in determining who gets what if any...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ascertain if the state/country you are living in recognizes common law marriages.
There are four requirements for a valid common law marriage. Just living together isn't enough to validate a common law marriage.
You must live together.
You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.
Although not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.
You must intend to be married.
In the U.S., every state is Constitutionally required to recognize as valid a common-law marriage that was recognized in another state.

Tips:

Common law marriages are recognized by: Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Washington, D.C.
Some of these have restrictions and only recognize common law marriages performed by a certain date: Georgia, January 1, 1997; Idaho, January 1, 1996; Ohio, October 10, 1991.
New Hampshire only recognizes common law marriages for probate purposes.

[Joda]

NDF, maybe the prior post will answer the question you E-mailed me about...Bye

[Queenie]

This is pitiful. I can ask a simple question regarding Last name rights... and I get the constitution.

When I asked what is David’s favorite dining places in Detroit, NO ONE REPLIES TO THE THREAD....

I figure this board out we has to start crazy Joy mess in order for the board to respond!!!!

Now if you y'all want me to I can look at Y&R and All My Children for a week and post stupid story lines change the names and we can have a ball.... The guest list will be so long we will have to pass out tickets.

Or we can keep this board plain and simple and reply to the simple request what is the man favorite restaurant no wonder David left for three days.. I can understand baby because y'all is touching a nerve with me. Before long, I am going to start hitting the bottle.

[Joda]

QueenNDF said:

This is pitiful. I can ask a simple question regarding Last name rights... and I get the constitution.

When I asked what is David’s favorite dining places in Detroit, NO ONE REPLIES TO THE THREAD....

I figure this board out we has to start crazy Joy mess in order for the board to respond!!!!

Now if you y'all want me to I can look at Y&R and All My Children for a week and post stupid story lines change the names and we can have a ball.... The guest list will be so long we will have to pass out tickets.

Or we can keep this board plain and simple and reply to the simple request what is the man favorite restaurant no wonder David left for three days.. I can understand baby because y'all is touching a nerve with me. Before long, I am going to start hitting the bottle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I wasn't going there child...There are answers in this, read and decipher for yourself... Bye Sunshine... :-)

[reggie]

Joy said:

, As for genna, I don’t believe she has ever lived with Ruffin long enough to be considered common law marriage. In most States you would have to live with that person for at least 8 to 10 years. And after reading her book, it didn’t appear that they did. David, I don’t believe ever stayed in one place too long. genna went to the courts to get her name changed AFTER David’s death. As far as I am concerned, her Last name is meaningless. Heck you and I could do that. It entitles her to nothing, as it would us.

Right you are Joy. I quoted part of your response in an effort not to further litter Beesnvme's board. The copying and pasting of that long legal decision further confirms the validity of your statements.
Example One-Ascertain if the state/country you are living in recognizes common law marriages.
There are four requirements for a valid common law marriage. Just living together isn't enough to validate a common law marriage.
You must live together.
You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.
Although not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.
You must intend to be married
These 4 requirements were not met.

Example 2-You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.
Although not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.
You must intend to be married.
In the U.S., every state is Constitutionally required to recognize as valid a common-law marriage that was recognized in another state.
Again requirements not met.

Example 3-Common-law marriage is generally a non-ceremonial relationship that requires "a positive mutual agreement, permanent and exclusive of all others, to enter into a marriage relationship, cohabitation sufficient to warrant a fulfillment of necessary relationship of man and wife, and an assumption of marital duties and obligations."

Certainly not met!

Example 4-Currently, only 9 states (Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, Oklahoma, Texas and the District of Columbia; see notes below re Utah and Pennsylvania) recognize common-law marriages contracted within their borders

My man lived in Michigan.

So Joy as you can see. Your statements are supported by the law.

Gone Girl.

Shout Out to the Palace

Reggie ;D