The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence Who we are Books Volokh Daily Email Archives Search DMCA RSS

Torts

N.C. Court Has Jurisdiction over Alienation of Affection Claim Brought Against Ex-Arizona-Senator Kyrsten Sinema

This tort, which lets people sue their spouses' lovers for interfering with the marriage, is litigated in about 150 new cases per year in North Carolina.

Eugene Volokh | 9.5.2026 6:56 PM

From Ammel v. Sinema, decided Friday by Judge David Bragdon (M.D.N.C.):

Ms. Ammel married Matthew Ammel in 2010. From 2014 through November 2024, they resided in Whispering Pines, North Carolina, with their three children.

Mr. Ammel met Ms. Sinema in August 2022, following his retirement from the military. At that time, Ms. Sinema was serving as a United States Senator for the State of Arizona. During her tenure in the Senate, Ms. Sinema maintained residences in both Arizona and Washington, DC. Ms. Sinema left the Senate and is currently a professor at Arizona State University and an attorney with Hogan Lovells Cadwalader in Washington, DC….

Mr. Ammel and Sinema apparently began an affair, which took place in California, New York, and Colorado. Eventually, Ms. Ammel learned of this, she and her husband separated, and she sued Sinema for "alienation of affections," a tort that North Carolina still recognizes and that is still often litigated in North Carolina courts. (Last fiscal year, for instance, there were 150 alienation of affections filings in N.C. courts; it's also apparently recognized in Hawaii, Mississippi, South Dakota, and Utah.)

To establish an alienation of affection claim, a party must show: "(1) there was a marriage with love and affection existing between the husband and wife; (2) that love and affection was alienated; and (3) the malicious acts of the defendant produced the loss of that love and affection." A malicious act "include[s] any intentional conduct that would probably affect the marital relationship." However, in cases in which the defendant has engaged in sexual intercourse with the plaintiff's spouse, malice is conclusively presumed.

The evidence [as alleged in plaintiff's Complaint] demonstrates that although the relationship between Mr. and Ms. Ammel was turbulent in 2024, there was still genuine love and affection between them, as reflected in their text messages. In October 2024, Mr. and Ms. Ammel took an anniversary trip that included intimacy and was followed by text messages in which they expressed their love for one another. The evidence also shows........

© Reason.com