0
If you are married in the community property jurisdiction of South Africa but are both domiciled in California what inheritance law applies after death of a parent?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
The laws of California would apply to any property located in California. Generally, the jurisdiction where the property is located has jurisdiction over it's distribution upon the death of the owner. You can add more details on the discussion page.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
It is right to say domiciled at or domiciled in?
domiciled at
How do you use domiciled in a sentence?
A man cannot be without a domicile, for he is not supposed to have abandoned his last domicile until he has acquired a new one.
What does domiciled mean?
Being domiciled means to have a residence somewhere. You may be asked where are you domiciled. You would answer with your current address.
Is a will required?
No. There is no requirement that a person execute a will. The estate of a person who dies without a will, or intestate, will be distributed according the the laws of intestacy in the jurisdiction where they were domiciled. You can check your state laws of intestacy at the link provided below.
If you move from California to Tennessee how long does it take to become a resident of the state of Tennessee?
According to Tennessee law, once you take the first step toward Tennessee with the intent to leave California and make your permanent domicile in Tennessee, you are then domiciled in Tennessee.
Can you write a sentence using the word domiciled?
When the tax auditor asked where James was domiciled, James knew that the auditor wanted to know where he made his home, where he lived.
Who is the home team in super bowl 50n?
Neither.. the Panthers are domiciled in Charlotte, and the Broncos are domiciled in Denver. I know Denver's wearing their white jerseys, which isn't their home jersey.
Where is Lincoln national structured settlement domiciled?
where is salt lake city
Can you file for divorce in the United Kingdom if you were married in New York?
It depends on where you are domiciled now.
Is it correct to say - you now domiciled in ogun state?
No - in fact, I have no clue as to what you are actually saying.
Explain the difference between personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction?
Both deal with (generally) federal court jurisdiction. In order for a court (and this can apply to state courts as well) to have jurisdiction over the parties involved, they must somehow be connected to that state. Generally this is satisfied by citizenship in that state. For instance, TN would have jurisdiction over a TN citizen. If the parties are not both from the forum state, then in order for the court to exercise jurisdiction, the foreign party must have certain connections with the forum state. This can become pretty complex, but the operative case is International Shoe v. Washington which requires so called "minimum contacts" between the foreign party and the forum state. For example, If I buy a bad burger that makes from a national fast food chain with multiple locations in TN, then that company may be sued in TN, even if it is not "domiciled" in TN, because there is probably personal jurisdiction over it because of its contacts with the forum state. There are other ways to exercise jurisdiction and there are multiple levels of intricacy, but that's the general gist. Subject Matter Jurisdiction instead deals with what types of cases a federal court can hear. Generally there are two types of Subject Matter Jurisdiction: First is Diversity Jurisdiction. This requires that the parties be "diverse" or from different states and that the "amount in controversy" be over $75,000. The second type is federal question jurisdiction, which provides a federal forum for any claim arising under federal law. Federal Civil Rights Violations are a good example. For federal question claims, there is not amount in controversy requirement and diversity is not necessary.
What is the difference between specific jurisdiction and general jurisdiction under general US laws?
General jurisdiction and specific jurisdiction is somewhat related to the Minimum contacts analysis put forth by International Shoe. A state that has general jurisdiction over a Defendant, either a person or a corporation, has the power over the Defendant for any claim arising in the world (meaning the claim does not have to have a transactional relationship with the forum (court asserting personal jurisdiction)). However, to have general jurisdiction over a defendant, the defendant must have systematic and continuous contacts with the state. Other points to remember for general jurisdiction: 1) a state always has general jurisdiction over a corporation that is headquartered there (i.e the state has power to bring the defendant, that has its headquarters there, into court for a claim arising outside of the state.) 2) a state always has general jurisdiction over a person that is domiciled in that state (i.e the state has power to bring the defendant, that has its domiciled there, into court for a claim arising outside of the state.) Specific Jurisdiction requires a transactional relationship (i.e the claims arises out of the Defendants in state activities (transactional relationship)), but only requires minimal minimum contacts, not systematic and continuous. Specific jurisdiction only allows the court power to adjudicate claims over the defendant arising out its in state activity.
