Massachusetts Libel Divorce Lack Jurisdiction Lawyers Attorneys

Dona B. Lycurgus v. Nicholas C. Lycurgusreason that the wife had moved into
Supreme Judicial Court of MassachusettsMassachusetts for the purpose of obtaining a
December 24, 1969divorce. After hearing, the trial judge dismissed
Facts:the objections and denied the husband's motion to
In September, 1965, Dona B. Lycurgus and herdismiss the libel for lack of jurisdiction.
husband and children left the United States to visit- Whether the trial court erred in denying the
Spain, France and Greece. From October, 1965, tomotion to dismiss the libel for lack of jurisdiction?
June, 1966, she resided temporarily in the cellar ofThe Court finds that the wife did not remove to
her mother-in-law's home in Greece. Both husbandMassachusetts for the purpose of obtaining a
and wife entered Greece on temporary visas, anddivorce. The husband lays great stress on the
the husband did nothing "to indicate he intended towife's testimony that she moved to Seekonk
remain permanently in Greece." Nor did the wifeafter learning from her Rhode Island attorney
"intend to acquire another domicile." In June, 1966,that she could not get a divorce in Massachusetts
the wife left her husband and returned to theunless she lived there. If that evidence stood
United States with her two children. Her intent atalone the decision below might be difficult to
that time was to return to Massachusetts.  Uponsustain. But it does not stand alone. There was
her arrival in the United States, the wife residedample support for the trial court judge's
temporarily with her brother and parents,conclusions that the wife always considered
respectively, who lived in Rhode Island in townsMassachusetts as her home and established one
adjoining Seekonk. While staying in Rhode Island,here as soon as she was financially able to do so,
she planned to earn a teacher's certificate toand that her stay in Rhode Island was of a
enable her to teach school in Massachusetts, andtemporary nature and was only for the purpose
she attended a college in Rhode Island for thatof enabling her to obtain a certificate to teach in
purpose.  Until she obtained a teaching position,Massachusetts schools.  It follows from the
she was dependent on her brother and parentsfindings, which are not plainly wrong, that the wife
she has not received any financial assistance fromwas domiciled in Seekonk when the libel was
the husband. While in Rhode Island, the wifebrought and that she did not remove there for
consulted a lawyer who advised her that a libelthe purpose of obtaining a divorce. The dismissal
for divorce "should be brought in Massachusetts,of the objections to the decree becoming
her domicile.  Then she filed the libel on Octoberabsolute, and the denial of the motion to dismiss
14, 1966.  Following a hearing in which thethe libel for lack of jurisdiction reveal no error of
husband did not appear, a decree nisi was enteredlaw and must be affirmed.
in favor of the wife on her libel for divorce.Disclaimer:
Before the decree became absolute, the husband,These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law
appearing specially, filed a statement of objectionsGroup.  They represent the firm's unofficial views
to the decree becoming absolute. One of theof the Justices' opinions.  The original opinions
objections was that the trial court was withoutshould be consulted for their authoritative content.
jurisdiction to enter a decree of divorce for the