Matter of Estate of Gadway, 43 N.Y.2d 931 (1978)
r
r
Domicile is a fixed, permanent, and principal home to which a person, wherever temporarily located, always intends to return; determining domicile is a mixed question of fact and law, focusing on the individual’s intent as demonstrated by their conduct.
r
r
Summary
r
This case addresses the determination of domicile for estate administration purposes. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s decision, finding that the testator, despite having been domiciled in New York previously, had established domicile in France at the time of his death. The court emphasized that while the testator had some connections to New York, his actions, such as purchasing a home in France where he resided with his wife and daughter, indicated an intent to remain in France indefinitely, thus establishing French domicile. The court considered conflicting statements made by the testator to tax authorities but ultimately focused on his overall conduct.
r
r
Facts
r
The testator was born and lived most of his life in New York. Sometime before his death, he sold his business and moved to France. After moving, his contacts with New York became minimal. He reserved a life estate in an apartment at his former business location. He occasionally visited New York and stayed at the apartment for short periods but always returned to France. In France, he lived with his French citizen wife and daughter in a substantial villa he purchased around the time of his retirement.
r
r
Procedural History
r
The Surrogate’s Court initially heard the case regarding the testator’s domicile. The Appellate Division reversed the Surrogate’s Court decision. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s ruling, concluding the testator was domiciled in France at the time of his death.
r
r
Issue(s)
r
Whether the testator was domiciled in France at the time of his death for the purposes of estate administration, despite his prior domicile in New York and some continued connections to the state.
r
r
Holding
r
Yes, because the testator’s conduct, including establishing a permanent residence in France with his family and minimal contact with New York, demonstrated an intent to remain in France indefinitely, thus establishing French domicile.
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
The court relied on SCPA 103 (subd 15), which defines domicile as “A fixed, permanent and principal home to which a person wherever temporarily located always intends to return.” The court acknowledged that determining domicile is a mixed question of fact and law, heavily reliant on the individual’s intent. Citing Matter of Newcomb, 192 N.Y. 238, 250, the court noted it is a question