MAS v. PERRY

Facts: Perry (D), a Louisiana domiciliary, challenges final judgment on grounds that Mr. and Mrs. Mas (P), Louisiana residents, failed to prove complete diversity.

Rule: For purposes of federal diversity jurisdiction, a party changes domicile only by taking up residence in another state with the intention to remain there, and a wife’s domicile is not necessarily deemed to be that of her husband.

Analysis: Mrs. Mas can claim diversity jurisdiction since she had a different domicile than Mr. Perry (D).  Prior to her marriage, Mrs. Mas (P) was a domiciliary of Mississippi, where she had her permanent home.  Her domicile did not change when she took up residence in Louisiana b/c she was a student and did not have intentions to remain in that state. Thus, Mrs. Mas should still be considered a Mississippi domiciliary after the marriage and there is complete diversity.

Although generally the domicile of a wife is deemed to be that of her husband’s, this concept does not apply to situations in which the husband is a foreign citizen who resides in the U.S.

*Domicile is determined at the time of filing the suit.  Otherwise, a D could avoid diversity jurisdiction by taking up residence in the same state as the P.