McCann v. The George W. Newman Irrevocable Trust
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
458 F.3d 281 (2006)
Facts
McCann (plaintiff) sued his employer, which was owned by the George W. Newman Irrevocable Trust (Newman) (defendant), for additional compensation. Newman filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the federal district court did not have jurisdiction over the matter because both McCann and Newman were domiciled in New Jersey. Newman’s office was in New Jersey, and Newman was domiciled in New Jersey. McCann and his wife, Virginia, lived in New Jersey exclusively until 1990, when they bought a second home in New Hampshire. In June 2000, the McCanns sold their New Jersey home, and Virginia moved to New Hampshire full-time. McCann continued to work in New Jersey during the week, renting an apartment there, and spent the weekends in New Hampshire. In November 2001, McCann stopped commuting to New Jersey regularly during the week. Thereafter, McCann traveled to New Jersey four times prior to his death in February 2002. The district court ruled that because McCann had both the burden of production regarding establishment of a new domicile in New Hampshire and the burden of persuasion regarding diversity of citizenship, it should apply a heightened, clear-and-convincing-evidence standard to McCann’s burden. The court found that McCann’s estate had not met this standard and granted Newman’s motion to dismiss.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Scirica, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
