Walls v. Ahmed
1993 WL 375238, 832 F. Supp. 940 (1993)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A person's domicile, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, is established by demonstrating an intent to make a particular location their permanent home and a physical presence in that location; the completion of a physical move is not a prerequisite if substantial steps indicate a commitment to the new domicile.
Facts:
- On August 3, 1992, Teresa Lynn Bastiand (the "Decedent") was involved in a multi-vehicle accident in Pennsylvania, resulting in her death.
- At the time of the accident, the Decedent was in the final phase of moving her personal property from her former home in New Jersey to her new home in Florida.
- In August 1991, the Decedent purchased a lot in Pt. St. Lucie, Florida.
- In November 1991, the Decedent executed an agreement of sale and a mortgage, and arranged for a home to be built on her Florida lot, overseeing its construction and inspecting the homesite.
- The Decedent enrolled her son in school in Florida and arranged for telephone service, obtaining an operating phone number there.
- The van the Decedent rented to transfer her personal property to Florida was rented on one-way terms.
- The Decedent obtained employment in Florida and expressed her belief that Florida was her permanent home.
Procedural Posture:
- Yvonne Walls, as executrix of the Estate of Teresa Lynn Bastiand, and Jacque Ramon Ahmadi, a minor, filed a wrongful death and survival action in federal court against Khalil Ahmed, William R. White, and Matsinger Enterprises, Inc.
- Defendant Khalil Ahmed contended in his trial brief that the federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
- The District Court heard evidence pertaining to jurisdiction to determine the Decedent's domicile.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the incomplete physical relocation of a person to their intended new permanent home preclude the establishment of domicile in that new state for purposes of diversity jurisdiction?
Opinions:
Majority - Katz, District Judge
No, the fact that the Decedent had not completed moving to her new home does not preclude her from being a citizen of the state she considered her permanent home. The court applied the two-factor test for domicile, which requires (1) the intent of the person in question to make a particular location their permanent home, and (2) physical presence. The court found clear evidence that the Decedent intended Pt. St. Lucie, Florida, to be her permanent home, noting that Florida was the center of her domestic, social, and civil life. Evidence supporting this intent included purchasing a lot, executing a sales agreement and mortgage for a home, overseeing construction, enrolling her son in school, arranging telephone service, renting a one-way moving van, obtaining employment, and explicitly stating Florida was her permanent home. The court concluded that the Decedent had established a significant and lasting physical presence in Florida and had abandoned her home in New Jersey. These uncontroverted facts were sufficient to overcome the presumption in favor of the Decedent's former domicile. The court also distinguished Illustration 4 of Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 19, emphasizing that the Decedent had already established a "home" in Florida and that Florida was the "center of her domestic, social and civil life." Therefore, the necessary conditions for diversity jurisdiction were satisfied.
Analysis:
This case clarifies that the physical completion of a move is not a strict prerequisite for establishing domicile for diversity jurisdiction purposes. It reinforces that domicile primarily depends on a person's intent to make a location their permanent home and a demonstrable physical presence, supported by a significant commitment to that new location. Future cases will likely use the detailed factors examined here (property ownership, family arrangements, employment, stated intent) to assess the strength of a party's claim to a new domicile, especially when the transition period is interrupted or incomplete. The ruling emphasizes the qualitative assessment of a person's "center of domestic, social and civil life" over a purely quantitative measure of relocation.
