- 26 -
Both questions before us appear to be matters of first
impression, and both sides maintain that our determination as to
the role of the marriage contract depends on Louisiana law. In
the absence of any Louisiana court opinion resolving these
matters, we make our own analysis of what Louisiana law provides.
See Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967).
We consider first whether a marriage contract, which was
properly filed for registry in the parish in which petitioners
were domiciled at the time of this filing, must also be filed for
registry in a different parish for the marriage contract to be
effective toward third persons as to movables,13 if petitioners
have in the meanwhile become domiciled14 in that different
parish.
12(...continued)
immediately before and during the trial, and (c) that both
petitioners intended that their counsel (1) continue to represent
both of them simultaneously in the instant case and (2) continue
to present in the instant case contentions which exposed Michael
to the potential of increased liabilities. See Rule 24(g)(2).
13 Both sides treat the matter before us as being
controlled entirely by the rules as to movables; under the
circumstances, we limit our determinations to the dispute that
the parties present.
14 The Louisiana statutory term is “domiciled”. From time
to time we refer to “residing”, or to “moving”. We intend
thereby to deal only with residence that constitutes domicile,
and with moving that constitutes changes of domicile, within the
meaning of that term in art. 2332.
Unless indicated otherwise, all article references are to
the articles of the Louisiana Civil Code Annotated (West 1985).
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011