Alienation of affection is a civil lawsuit a married person can file against a third party whose intentional conduct destroyed the marriage, seeking money damages for the loss of love and companionship. It is separate from divorce, which resolves matters between the spouses themselves. Only five states still allow the claim: Hawaii, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah. Even in those states, the proof requirements are strict enough that many claims never reach trial.
What You Have to Prove
Courts generally require the plaintiff to establish three elements. All three matter, and failing on any one of them ends the case.
Genuine Love and Affection in the Marriage
The marriage has to have been a real, functioning relationship with emotional connection before the defendant appeared. Testimony from friends or family who observed the couple, shared vacations, affectionate messages, and similar evidence help paint that picture. A marriage that was already hollow is going to struggle at this stage.
That Love Was Damaged or Destroyed
The plaintiff must show the affection that existed was lost. This is often tied to the timing of the defendant’s involvement and the deterioration of the relationship that followed.
The Defendant’s Conduct Was the Controlling Cause
The defendant has to have intentionally acted in a way that foreseeably harmed the marriage. “Malicious” shows up in these cases, but it does not require scheming or evil motive; it means the defendant knowingly engaged in conduct likely to interfere. Text messages, emails, hotel receipts, and witness testimony typically carry the weight here.
The actions have to be the controlling cause of the lost affection, not a contributing factor in a marriage already unraveling for other reasons. If the couple was headed for divorce regardless, blaming a third party will not hold up.
Who Can Be Sued
Most people assume only a romantic affair partner faces liability, but the claim reaches further. Any third party whose intentional interference destroyed the marriage can be a defendant. Courts have seen claims against overbearing in-laws who systematically undermined the relationship, close friends who actively encouraged a spouse to leave, and in rare cases, professionals like therapists who crossed ethical boundaries in advising one spouse. The question is whether the defendant’s deliberate actions drove the spouses apart, not whether the defendant was romantically involved with either of them.
Where You Can Still File
The overwhelming majority of states abolished alienation of affection decades ago, viewing it as a relic that invited abuse and extortion more than it delivered justice. As of 2026, the claim survives in:
- Hawaii
- Mississippi
- North Carolina
- South Dakota
- Utah
North Carolina sees far more of these cases than the other states and has produced the largest verdicts. Illinois eliminated the claim in 2016, and New Mexico’s Supreme Court abolished the tort in early 2026. Utah’s legislature passed a bill in 2026 that will end the claim there effective May 2027, so it remains available through the end of 2026 but not much longer. The trend over the past century has moved in one direction only.
Filing Deadlines
Each state sets its own window. North Carolina requires the lawsuit to be filed within three years of the last act that caused the alienation. Other states have similar deadlines, though the exact length and the event that starts the clock vary. Missing the deadline forfeits the claim, so timing matters from the moment a spouse suspects interference.
Common Defenses
Defendants have several ways to fight these claims, and the most effective attacks go straight at causation.
- The marriage was already failing. Evidence of frequent arguments, prior infidelity by either spouse, long separations, or documented unhappiness makes it hard to pin the blame on a third party.
- The defendant did not know the person was married. This comes up more often than people expect, particularly with casual relationships or dating app encounters, and it is generally a valid defense in alienation of affection cases.
- There was no intentional interference. A friendship that naturally developed into something more, without the defendant actively trying to break up the marriage, undermines the intent element.
- The married spouse initiated and pursued the relationship. Some courts recognize this as a defense on the theory that the defendant did not cause the alienation if the spouse was already determined to stray.
Weak or ambiguous evidence also sinks many claims. A handful of business-related phone calls or a friendly letter without romantic content will not convince a court that someone intentionally destroyed a marriage.
Damages and What Awards Look Like
A successful plaintiff can recover compensatory damages for lost companionship, emotional distress, humiliation, and damage to reputation. Because these losses are hard to quantify, juries have wide discretion in setting amounts.
When the defendant’s behavior was particularly egregious, the court may add punitive damages on top of the compensatory award. Punitive damages exist to punish and deter, and they can dwarf the compensatory portion. One widely cited North Carolina verdict produced $2.2 million in compensatory damages and $6.6 million in punitive damages. Six- and seven-figure awards are not unusual in states with active alienation of affection dockets. The practical catch is that many defendants lack the assets to pay a large judgment, so winning the suit and collecting on it are two different problems.
Taxes on an Award
The IRS treats most of this money as taxable income. Federal law excludes damages received for personal physical injuries or physical sickness from gross income, but emotional harm does not qualify as a physical injury under the tax code.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 26 USC 104 – Compensation for Injuries or Sickness Because alienation of affection claims are built around emotional and relational losses, compensatory damages are generally includable in gross income. Punitive damages are taxable regardless of the type of case and should be reported as other income.2Internal Revenue Service. Tax Implications of Settlements and Judgments On a seven-figure judgment, the tax bill is significant enough that a tax professional should be involved before any money is spent.
Criminal Conversation Is a Separate Claim
In several of the same states, a plaintiff can also bring a claim called criminal conversation. Despite the name, it has nothing to do with criminal charges. It is a civil lawsuit based on the allegation that the defendant had sexual intercourse with the plaintiff’s spouse during the marriage.
The two claims are often filed together but work differently. Alienation of affection focuses on the destruction of love and companionship, which can happen without a physical affair. Criminal conversation is narrower and requires proof that sex actually occurred before the couple separated. In some states, a criminal conversation defendant cannot use ignorance of the marriage as a defense, unlike in alienation of affection cases.
Before You File
An alienation of affection lawsuit is a separate civil action from divorce, though the two often run in parallel. Filing one does not require filing the other, but the evidence gathered usually overlaps with what matters in a divorce, particularly around custody and property.
Costs add up quickly. Court filing fees, attorney retainers, and the expense of gathering evidence through private investigators or subpoenas can run into tens of thousands of dollars before trial. These cases often hinge on circumstantial evidence about private behavior, and building a strong evidentiary record takes time and money. The emotional cost is real too: the lawsuit puts intimate details of the marriage into public court filings.
The first step for anyone considering this type of claim is confirming the state still recognizes it. Filing where the tort has been abolished wastes money and time, and even in states that allow it, the trend toward abolition means the law could shift before a case concludes.