Lauderdale Peerage Claim

17 Abb. N. Cas. 439
New York Supreme Court·Decided July 15, 1885·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Opinions.

—On the first point indicated in head-note (l),as

to change of domicile, the Earl of Selbokxe, after laying down the principle that “ The onus of proving a change of domicile, animo et facto,- lies upon those who assert it;” adverted to the [446]*446facts in detail, and concluded by saying : “It is not because-a-critical state of health may oblige a man to go, or to remain with the prospect of dying, abroad, that he can be held to have abandoned, either animo or facto, his domicile of ori- ■ gin/’

Upon this point, Lord Fitzgerald added : “The extent to which the -evidence must be carried to put an end to the domicile of origin is explained in clear terms in the Countess of Dalhousie’s Case,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Lauderdale Peerage Claim, 17 Abb. N. Cas. 439 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1885).

17 Abb. N. Cas. 439 (Lauderdale Peerage Claim) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related