Case ID: la_143/html/0625-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "O’NIELL, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(79 South. 79)
    No. 22314.
    MADDUX v. MADDUX.
    (May 27, 1918.
    Rehearing Denied June 29, 1918.)
    
      (Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
    
    Divorce <&wkey;124 — Separation erom Bed and Board — Jurisdiction—Domicile.
    In a wife’s suit for separation, evidence held to sustain a judgment dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction in the civil district court, in that defendant’s domicile was in another parish.
    Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; George H. Théard, Judge.
    Suit by Marie Josephine Maddux against N. Watts Maddux for separation from bed and board. Judgment for defendant dismissing the suit, and plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    L. Fred Andry, of New Orleans (Clifford E. Hays, of New Orleans, of counsel), for appellant. Lyle Saxon, of New Orleans, for appellee.
   O’NIELL, J.

The plaintiff appeals from a judgment dismissing her suit for separation from bed and board. A plea to the jurisdiction of the civil district court for the parish of Orleans was maintained, on the ground that the defendant’s domicile was in the parish of St. Martin.

The case presents only the question of fact whether the defendant, whose matrimonial domicile was in the city of New Orleans, and who moved to the parish of St. Martin seven months before this suit was filed, had the intention of residing there permanently. He testified that he had that intention, and his testimony was corroborated by two witnesses who swore that he had established his residence in the parish of St. Martin, and that his business required his remaining there. There is no evidence in the record to justify a reversal of the judgment appealed from.

The judgment is affirmed.