domicile

1
domicile
2
White v Tennant(W.Va. 1888)
3

• 15. Domicil Of Choice
• (1) A domicil of choice is a domicil acquired,
  through the exercise of his own will, by a person
  who is legally capable of changing his domicil.
• (2) To acquire a domicil of choice, a person must
  establish a dwelling-place with the intention of
  making it his home.
• (3) The fact of physical presence at a
  dwelling-place and the intention to make it a
  home must concur if they do so, even for a
  moment, the change of domicil takes place.

4

• 10. Domicil By What Law Determined
• (1) A question of domicil as between the state of
  the forum and another state is determined by the
  law of the forum.

5

• 121. Law Governing Validity Of Marriage
• Except as stated in 131 and 132, a marriage is
  valid everywhere if the requirements of the
  marriage law of the state where the contract of
  marriage takes place are complied with.

6

• 132. Marriage Declared Void By Law Of Domicil
• A marriage which is against the law of the state
  of domicil of either party, though the
  requirements of the law of the state of
  celebration have been complied with, will be
  invalid everywhere in the following cases
• (a) polygamous marriage,
• (b) incestuous marriage between persons so
  closely related that their marriage is contrary
  to a strong public policy of the domicil,
• (c) marriage between persons of different races
  where such marriages are at the domicil regarded
  as odious,
• (d) marriage of a domiciliary which a statute at
  the domicil makes void even though celebrated in
  another state.

7
2nd Rest 283(2)A marriage which satisfies the
requirements of the state where the marriage was
contracted will everywhere be recognized as valid
unless it violates the strong public policy of
another state which had the most significant
relationship to the spouses and the marriage at
the time of the marriage.
8
Uniform Marriage Evasion Act (adopted
Massachusettss 1913)No marriage shall be
contracted in this commonwealth by a party
residing and intending to continue to reside in
another jurisdiction if such marriage would be
void if contracted in such other jurisdiction,
and every marriage contracted in this
commonwealth in violation hereof shall be null
and void.
9

• 134. Marriage Contrary To Public Policy
• If any effect of a marriage created by the law of
  one state is deemed by the courts of another
  state sufficiently offensive to the policy of the
  latter state, the latter state will refuse to
  give that effect to the marriage.

10
characterization
11
Levy v. Daniels U-Drive(Conn. 1928)
12

• Venuto v Robinson (3d Cir 1941)
• Robinson agreed in NC to lease his equipment to
  Ross Motor Lines and to take load for Ross from
  NC to New England
• Robinson had accident in NJ
• Venuto (a domiciliary of NJ) sues Ross (and
  Robinson) in NJ ct
• NJ law allowed for derivative liability
• NC law did not

13
- Assume that the contract between Daniels and
Sack had by chance been entered into in
Massachusetts rather than Conn. But the facts of
the case were otherwise the same
14
Haumschild v Continental Cas Co. (Wisc. 1959)
15

• Haumschild While the appellant's counsel did
  not request that we overrule Buckeye v. Buckeye,
  supra, and the subsequent Wisconsin case dealing
  with this particular conflict of laws problem, he
  did specifically seek to have this court apply
  California's conflict of laws principle, that the
  law of the domicile is determinative of
  interspousal capacity to sue, to this particular
  case. However, to do so would violate the well
  recognized principle of conflict of laws that,
  where the substantive law of another state is
  applied, there necessarily must be excluded such
  foreign state's law of conflict of laws.

16

• Swank v Hufnagle
• Ohio woman guaranteed husbands debt with
  promissory note, executed in Ohio, and backed up
  by security interest on Indiana land
• Ohio allowed woman to be surety for their
  husbands
• Indiana did not
• Suit in Indiana to enforce security interest

17

• Burr v Beckler
• In Florida, Illinois wife guaranteed husbands
  debt, backed up by security interest in Illinois
  property
• Florida had prohibition on wives acting as surety
• Illinois didnt
• Suit in Illinois to enforce security interest

18

• Thomson v Kyle
• Alabama woman executed promissory note in Ala
  backed up by mortgage on land in Florida
• Once again wives cant be surety under Ala law
• They can under Florida law
• Suit in Florida to enforce security interest

19

• Caldwell v Gore
• D erected dam on La property
• Obstructed flow of water upstream to Ps property
  in Ark
• La had servitude of lower land to higher to
  receive water flow freely
• Ark law allowed obstruction if reasonable etc.

20
substance/procedure
21
Grant v McAuliffe (Cal. 1953)