Lyon v. Glaser

In Lyon v. Glaser, 60 N.J. 259, 288 A.2d 12 (1972) the Court held that New Jersey inheritance tax inapplicable because decedent was no longer a New Jersey resident during the relevant period. The New Jersey Supreme Court defined domicile as: Very much a matter of the mind--of intention. One may be acquired, or changed to a new one, when there is a concurrence of certain elements; i.e., an actual and physical taking up of an abode in a particular State, accompanied by an intention to make his home there permanently or at least indefinitely, and to abandon his old domicil. A person has the right to choose his own domicil, and his motive in doing so is immaterial. The change may be made to avoid taxation, so long as the necessary ingredients for establishment of the new domicil are present. A very short period of residence in a given place may be sufficient to show domicil, but mere residence, regardless of its length, is not sufficient. It has been said that concurrence, even for a moment, of physical presence at a dwelling place with the intention of making it a permanent abode, effects a change of domicil. And once established, the domicil continues until a new one is found to have been acquired through an application of the same tests. Lyon, 60 N.J. at 264, 288 A.2d 12.