You've probably heard of alimony, which is the monetary payment that one spouse may be required to pay the other during or after a divorce. Oftentimes separated spouses will battle back and forth until the judge rewards the proper alimony amount and declares it permanent or temporary. But what you may not have known is that alimony isn't just for divorced couples. According to Merriam-Webster, "palimony" is a court-ordered allowance paid by one member of a couple formerly living together out of wedlock to the other.

In a research project by Discovery Health, it was found that 60 to 70 percent of couples today live together before choosing to marry. A 2010 national census determined that 7.5 million of all American couples live together, and that number only seems to be on the rise. Cohabitation used to be frowned upon in American society, but now it is a practical way to find out whether or not you and your partner would be compatible as husband and wife. When a couple cohabits they are inevitably sharing possessions. This can lead to massive conflicts if the couple decides to separate after a long period of time. Like husband and wife, the cohabiting couple may depend on each other for financial and collateral needs. Also, many dating couples choose to have children out of wedlock, and they are affected by this separation.

Though no legal divorce is necessary when a couple has never signed a marriage contract, the implications of leaving a long-time partner will affect both parties much like a divorce would. Therefore, some states have enforced palimony as a way to soften the economic blow. Palimony was publicized by the California court case Marvin V. Marvin in 1976. In this case, the plaintiff claimed that she had entered an oral agreement with her partner that they would combine their efforts and share all property and profit with each other whether the goods were individually gained or not. As a part of the agreement, the plaintiff would render her services as a housekeeper, cook, companion and homemaker.

When her boyfriend did not uphold this agreement, the plaintiff took it to court. At the end of the case, the Supreme Court ruled that if an agreement does not rest on meretricious consideration then both parties can order their economic affairs however they prefer. No policy precludes the courts from enforcing contracts. The Supreme Court also considered the property rights of a non-marital partner in the absence of an express contract. They decided that in California, a domestic partnership can come with implied partnerships constructive trusts, resulting trusts, and quantum meruit's can be employed.

Unlike alimony, "palimony' is extremely subjective, and the court is not obligated to issue it. A plaintiff needs to prove an underlying cause for his or her claim, such as an expressed or implied contract. Live-in couples do not have the same rights as married couples, because those are enforced by the legal marriage documents. According to a later court case, Taylor v. Polackwich, the court ruled that palimony rests on an "underlying right to relief." A plaintiff needs to carefully outline why he or she deserves alimony for the separation.

The court does not allow cohabitants any of the "rights" granted to married couples, but they have the "right" to seek compensation if they desire to do so. Courts traditionally recognize implied agreements, oral agreements, and written agreements for palimony in certain contexts. Not every state recognizes palimony. If you believe that you should be receiving palimony because of an agreement between you and a former partner, then you should appeal to the court. A family law attorney can help you to organize your evidence and decipher your claim.