My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-02-24 Reg
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2014
>
2014-02-24 Reg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/9/2014 5:48:36 PM
Creation date
4/9/2014 5:48:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
2/24/2014
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. Pace stated that the opposite is true with respect to the slam-dunk <br />Mr. Crow and Ms. Carr claimed in the question of Mr. Hales’ residency. He <br />stated that the court debunks this notion of a slam-dunk in the 1972 <br />Supreme Court case, King vs. Walsh where the majority opinion states “The <br />question of residence or domicile is one of fact, a question often difficult to <br />determine”. Mr. Pace stated that King vs. Walsh was a split decision with a <br />narrow four vote majority. Two dissenting opinions were written, which is a <br />testament to the difficulty of the question. He stated that the proper <br />conclusion of residency for Mr. Hales, according to King vs. Walsh, is that his <br />original domicile, Clayton, was his residence until his mother sold her home <br />in April of 2013. Mr. Pace stated that the court states that “A temporary <br />absence of a person from his usual residence through a series of years does <br />not necessarily cause a loss of such residence. A person can have but one <br />domicile, which when once established continues until he renounces it”. He <br />stated that the court in King vs. Walsh set a high bar for renouncement. Mr. <br />Kit Bond swore that he was a resident of Georgia for twelve months in order <br />for him to join the Georgia Bar. Yet the Court ruled that not even this was a <br />renouncement of Mr. Bond’s Missouri residency. <br /> Mr. Pace stated that Mr. Hales grew up in Clayton and never renounced <br />his residency in Clayton. He stated that the Court states that “The original <br />domicile is favored and where the facts are conflicting the presumption is <br />strongly in favor of an original or former domicile, as against an acquired <br />one”. Mr. Pace stated that Mr. Hales knew that he could always go home, <br />and he did just that by moving back into his childhood home when he was <br />rehabbing property in University City. Mr. Pace concluded by stating that <br />this is the proper interpretation of King vs. Walsh. <br /> <br />P.COUNCIL COMMENTS <br /> <br /> <br />Q.ADJOURNMENT <br /> <br /> <br />Mayor Shelley Welsch announced that the meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.