Legal Opinion

Matter of Marriage of Pirouzkar

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 6, 1981No. 15-80-02289, CA 17984PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.

Wife appeals from the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of her petition for dissolution. The trial court determined that, under ORS 107.075, one of the parties to a dissolution proceeding must be domiciled in this state, and that plaintiff is unable to establish that she is a domiciliary because of her nonimmigrant alien status. We agree that the statute requires that one party be domiciled in this state, but find that wife has shown that she is an Oregon domiciliary for purposes of the jurisdiction of the circuit court in this dissolution proceeding. We reverse.

The parties…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Williams v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Elkins v. MorenoSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Zimmerman v. ZimmermanOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Elwert v. ElwertOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Rodda v. RoddaOregon Supreme Court · 1948

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Nagaraja v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  2. Nicolas v. NicolasDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  3. North Pacific Insurance v. SwitzlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  4. Sinha v. SinhaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Padron v. PadronSupreme Court of Georgia · 2007

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API