A lesbian married in Massachusetts has filed for an annulment from her partner in a Buchanan County court, creating a legal challenge in a state that overwhelming voted four years ago that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Charisse Y. Sparks and Janet Y. Peters Mauceri Sparks were married in Boston in April 2005, a little less than a year after Massachusetts became the first and only state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage.

Shortly following the ceremony, the women moved to Missouri, and in late 2007 Ms. Sparks entered the court system for a dissolution.

Buchanan County Circuit Judge Daniel Kellogg said the case is being treated as an annulment, not a divorce. Ms. Sparks, in her petition filed in October, does not recognize her marriage.

William Bird, the attorney for Ms. Sparks, asks in court documents that the marriage in Massachusetts be declared invalid from the beginning because Missouri doesn’t recognize same-sex couples. The petition also states the marriage is null and void because it violates a Massachusetts law.

Ms. Peters Mauceri Sparks’ attorney, Kay Madden, argues the marriage ceremony is legal, as Missouri courts have long held that out-of-state marriages, if valid where entered, will be respected in Missouri, even if the marriages couldn’t have been performed here.

Mr. Kellogg has taken the rare matter under careful consideration.

The case may be the first same-sex filing in Missouri, and may then set precedent for cases to follow, according to sources on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate and the Missouri attorney general’s office.

“I haven’t seen it before. It’s under advisement right now,” Mr. Kellogg said.

Both parties declined to comment on the case, citing an active legal proceeding.

The ruling on the failed marriage between the women could bring back the contentious debate over same-sex marriage.

The Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian-based group, recently hailed a decision by the state Supreme Court in Rhode Island to deny a lesbian couple married in Massachusetts a divorce in that state.

Greg Scott, a spokesman for the group, said if Mr. Kellogg was to grant the couple a divorce or annulment, the ruling would “overrule” the will of Missourians, who in 2004 voted overwhelming for a constitutional amendment that prevents same-sex marriages from being conducted or recognized in Missouri.

“These divorce cases are a sneak attack on marriage,” he said. “I mean, you can’t have a divorce when a marriage doesn’t exist.”

Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, an organization seeking equality in marriage between gay and straight couples, said the Rhode Island ruling in December was a setback for recognition of same-sex marriages.

Increasingly, he said, such cases are popping up in courts across the country, and as they do, will turn public sentiment against the “gay exception” in both marriage and divorce.

“I think people in Missouri are fair, and the more they learn and hear about real couples like this and ask themselves, do they really hate gay relationships so much that they won’t let gay people out of them?” Mr. Wolfson said.

Mr. Kellogg is scheduled to hear the case again at 8:30 a.m. April 2.

Ahmad Safi can be reached

at ahmadsafi@npgco.com.