- 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 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011