Appellees Jean Paul Mas, a citizen of France, and Judy Mas were married at her home in Jackson, Mississippi and employed in Baton Rouge after graduation. They moved to Illinois, then returned to Baton Rouge. Upon returned, the Mas’s rented an apt. from Perry, who installed a two-way mirror and watched during three of the first four months of their marriage.
Appellant made an oral motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, which was denied at trial.
Was the district court correct in dismissing Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship?
No party on one side may be a citizen of the same state as any party on the other side. Jurisdiction is unaffected by subsequent changes in the citizenship of parties.
To be a citizen of a state a natural-born person must be a US citizen and a domiciliary of that state. For diversity purposes, citizenship means domicile. A person’s domicile is the place of his fixed permanent home and principal establishment, which he is intent to return. Mr. Mas cannot be considered a domiciliary of France (his wife would then have to be an attached citizen). A woman does not have her citizenship changed because she marries an alien. The Mas’s did not intend to remain in Baton Rouge and are therefore domiciles of Mississippi.