NEWARK, New Jersey - Before she was married at her parent's home six years ago, Houida Saadeh and her groom, Zuhair Odatalla, signed a traditional Islamic marriage license called a "mahr."
Odatalla handed his future bride a golden pound coin and promised her another dlrs 10,000 if the two should ever part.
In October 1999, the marriage dissolved, but Saadeh never received the money. So she took Odatalla to court — and won her mahr.
In a landmark divorce settlement, a New Jersey judge has ruled that a mahr is binding contract.
Superior Court Judge John E. Selser III agreed with Saadeh that the court could intervene without violating the constitutional separation of church and state. He reasoned he did not have to interpret any religious doctrine to make the ex-husband pay up.
"It wasn't about the money. It was a matter of principle. It was a contract between the two of us, and I expected him to abide by it," said Saadeh, 25.
Odatalla's lawyer, Thomas R. Raimondi, said his client intends to pay the money.
The decision could set a precedent for how American judges interpret the legal standing of mahrs. There are an estimated 1 million such contracts in the United States.
"This decision should play a significant role in correcting the inconsistency and confusion generated from the erroneous conception of the mahr as a prenuptial agreement and set the next trend of mahr cases," Awad said.
"With this decision, I believe it will make it easier for wives to recover their rightful mahr. In addition it will give religious clerics more teeth for enforcement," Awad said.
Awad said the mahr has no equivalent in Western culture since it is neither a dowry nor a prenuptial agreement. He described it as a premarital gift from the man to the woman.
The deal between Saadeh and Odatalla was made June 15, 1996, just before their Islamic wedding ceremony. The terms were negotiated by the parents of the couple, according to a videotape of the talks and ceremony viewed by the judge.
Saadeh was 19 at the time; Odatalla was about 24.
As part of the divorce, Saadeh maintained that she was due the dlrs 10,000, noting that demands for the mahr are customarily not made unless the husband dies or the couple splits. The mahr money is due in addition to other payments, such as an inheritance or alimony, Awad said.
"The reason that I did this, the whole point of it, is because I wanted to make a statement," Saadeh said. "Many women who are unhappy don't pursue it because they just want to get out of the marriage."