Interdiction of Dumas
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Second District Court, parish of Orleans. Tissott J. Dumas has always had his domicile in the City of New Orleans, where he was born and married, though his residence has been temporarily in Prance. It is only the political, not the civil domicile, which is forfeited by an absence of two years. Dumas never acquired a domicile in Prance. Even if he had forfeited his domicile here, still the suit must be brought befe re the Court of his last domicile.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Second District Court, parish of Orleans. Tissott J. Dumas has always had his domicile in the City of New Orleans, where he was born and married, though his residence has been temporarily in Prance. It is only the political, not the civil domicile, which is forfeited by an absence of two years. Dumas never acquired a domicile in Prance. Even if he had forfeited his domicile here, still the suit must be brought befe re the Court of his last domicile. Dvery interdiction must be pronounced by the judge of the domicile of the person to be interdicted. O. 0. 392 ; Nap. 0. 492 ; O.…
1Opinion
On PiETmeN foe Rehearing.
We have given full consideration to the application for a rehearing, reviewing the original briefs, our own opinion, considering the points in support of the petition, and even the judgment of the Court of Appeals of Paris, filed with the petition, dealing with it, however, merely as with an argument, and in no way as evidence, for it is foreign to the record.
We remain satisfied that the Second District Court had no jurisdiction of the person of Dumas, who had forfeited his domicile here by a voluntary absence and residence in Sh'ance of seven times hoo years, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Purves v. LexSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887