Boyd' Exor. v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In Dicey on the Conflict of Laws, at page 106, the author says: ‘ ‘ ‘ The only principle which can be laid down as governing all questions of domicile is this, that where a party is alleged to have abandoned his domicile of origin, and to have acquired a new one, it is necessary to show that there was both the factum and the animus. There must be the act, and there must be the intention. “ ‘A new domicile is not acquired until there is not only a fixed intention of establishing a permanent residence in some other county, but until also this intention has been carried out by actual residence there. “ ‘In 14 Cyc. 838, we find: “ ‘Domicile of choice is entirely a question of residence and intent or, as it is usually put, the factum and the animus. Both must concur in order that the domicile may be deemed established. ’ ‘ ‘ ‘ The character of residence and the time it is occu- , pied are unimportant, but there must be an actual occupancy of the residence chosen for some time, however short, in order that the change of residence may become effective. 14 Cyc. 839.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rudolph v. Wetherington's Administrator

2. ““There is a broad distinction between a legal and actual residence. A legal residence, (domicile) can not, in the nature of things, co-exist in the same person in two states or countries. He must have a legal residence somewhere. He can not be a cosmopolitan. The sucees sion to movable property, whether testamentary or in case of intestacy, except as regulated by statute; the jurisdiction of the probate of wills; the right to vote; the liability to poll-tax, and to military duty, and other things, all depend upon the party’s legal residence or domicile. For these purposes he must have a legal residence. The law will, from facts and circumstances, fix a legal residence for him, unless he voluntarily fixes it himself. His legal residence consists of fact and intention ; both must concur; and when his legal residence is once fixed, it requires both fact and intention to change it.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Millett's v. Commonwealth

3. ““A removal which does not contemplate an absence from the former domicile for an indefinite and uncertain time is not a change of it. But when there is a removal, unless it can be shown or inferred from circumstances that it was for some particular purpose, expected to be only of a temporary nature, or in the exercise of some particular profession, office or calling, it does change the domicile. The result is, that the place of residence is prima facie the domicile, unless there be some motive for that residence not inconsistent with a clearly established intention to retain a permanent residence in another place. ’ ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Millett's v. Commonwealth