Legal Opinion

Viles v. City of Waltham

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 4, 1893PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.

The question at issue is whether the domicil of the plaintiff was in Waltham on May 1, 1890, and the only exceptions relate to the introduction of evidence bearing on that issue. There was no dispute at the trial that his domicil was in Waltham until April 28, 1890, when he started for Chicago, arriving there the following day. It was also in evidence that he afterwards dwelt in Chicago, and had his principal place of business there.

To acquire a domicil there must be residence in a place and an intention to make that place one’s home. To maintain his suit the plaintiff was required to prove,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Mutual Life Insurance v. HillmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Insurance Co. v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  3. Hancock v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1858
  4. Allen v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
  5. Wright v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Inhabitants of Sturbridge v. FranklinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
  2. Jacobi v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
  3. Ickes v. IckesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  4. Commonwealth v. AckerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  5. Conklin v. Consolidated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907

23 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