ÿWPC• Y|eìli€tîI il­ù>”2úÑ¡2–¶T4Iü:8W›0CÁàÎO÷ºÈ̦ò(è£(QWø¯æý•ÑÆ­Ñz8^ñ;e '»Æà2ûŸl³È>§‰"Þúú² Ö¨¿e»u5p ^ßâUÔæ ™cB{Ïeš»0oSX—'mÑ¢wÕt‡”éo3pB’ ðRŒ÷««d˜Æ˜ñàˆ7ØÏ\(Zêo k\Wpª|§lõdgOP65î"¹¤¥I`7S¸ðlzÙ!î³O_e‹‰HʘØ(Sá,±¤„×Ý.‚»1Tˆ¦Q@MÊú˜–î¼[X |ã2Þ Ã&Èm<‹ñß«Àh|­tíοµgY”O$d˜8íë@Dû *P*ðµâÃ-G=K‘Ì˘æÄìÛ²:k»-² çn+˜Ÿ)&ST€àµ0yº )®t -ßîsäÅ3ú$”EGy^ø.Wѳ,~Êm<ìæ’™¹Ò ëšd@>ï.¡™dÖ¹óhk6\ñÍ­d~b¯&² [’˜¾a'{ÅßlcBz…ÞIÂÄ 2+~e^ËŠ/MW‡€ÈlÎH‡’{ÏÔñúT–íù qAâèZ›Û##ÁêUN« %ù 0(ÿw'4+?NN 0lP 0D¼^   m-5-KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK Bx˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(uHš Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡š‚,-3|x((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó÷vŸ-s ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ  Ñ ° Ñ #Ñ#€Xÿÿd#Ñ dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼ þ»XXÔÑ€OaÑÑ€zlÑà@‰ ‰ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE€ˆÐ ° Ðà@§§$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ  ÐÔ€X@rX»¼ þÔà@±±ìàSeptember€3,€2002€SessionˆÐ Ô$ ÐÌÔ€¼ þ»XX@rÔò òà@ÐÐìàIN€RE:€THE€ESTATE€OF€HARLEY€TIMOTHY€PRICEˆÐ ¬ü ÐÌÔ€X@rX»¼ þÔó óà@B B ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€of€Marion€CountyˆÐ Ô $ Ðà@Æ Æ ìàNo.€P5„215€€€€Chancellor€Jeffrey€F.€StewartˆÐ À  Ðó óÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à_____________________________Ð ˜ è  ÐÒe°ÒÌà@% % Æàò òNo.€M2002„00332„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CVó 󀄀ò òFiled€December€31,€Ô_Ô2002ó óÔ_ԈРpÀ  Ðà ½ àà  àà m àà Å à_____________________________Ð `°  ÐÌà ½ àThis€case€involves€an€appeal€by€Mrs.€Cynthia€A.€Price,€widow€of€Harley€Timothy€Price,Ð 8ˆ  Ðwho€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€Mr.€Price€was€domiciled€in€Marion€County,Ð $t ÐTennessee€thereby€providing€a€jurisdictional€basis€for€the€probate€of€his€will.€€In€responding€to€thisÐ ` Ðappeal,€the€estate€of€Harley€Timothy€Price€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€Mrs.Ð üL ÐCynthia€A.€Price€has€standing€to€contest€the€jurisdiction€of€the€Court.€€The€trial€court€found€thatÐ è8 ÐMrs.€Price€had€standing€to€contest€jurisdiction.€€It€also€found€that€Mr.€Price€was€domiciled€in€theÐ Ô$ ÐState€of€Tennessee€and,€therefore,€the€letters€testamentary€were€issued.€€For€the€reasons€stated€inÐ À Ðthis€opinion,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€decision€as€to€both€issues.Ð ¬ü ÐÓ€ÐÓÌÓ€¬Óò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€is€Affirmed€andÐ úJ ÐRemandedÐ æ6 ÐÌó óÔ_ÔJ.S.Ô_Ô€DANIEL,€Ô_ÔSp.J.Ô_Ô,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court€in€which€BEN€H.€Ô_ÔCANTRELLÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€M.S.,Ð ¾ Ðand€WILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€J.€joined.Ð ªú ÐÌCharles€J.€Ô_ÔGearhiserÔ_Ô€and€Robin€L.€Miller,€Chattanooga,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Cynthia€A.Ð ‚ Ò ÐPrice.Ð n!¾ ÐÌJ.€Michael€Sharp,€Cleveland,€Tennessee€and€Tracy€C.€Wooden,€Chattanooga,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ F#–! ÐAppellee,€Estate€of€Harley€Timothy€Price.Ð 2$‚" ÐÌÌà@(Æàòòò òFACTSóóó óˆÐ ö&F"% ÐÌà ½ àMr.€Harley€Timothy€Price€had€previously€been€married€and€was€the€father€of€four€children.€Ð Î($' ÐOn€April€23,€1998,€Mr.€Price€executed€a€will€leaving€all€of€his€property€to€his€four€children.€Ð º) %( ÐThereafter,€on€September€23,€1999,€Mr.€Price€executed€a€codicil€to€his€1998€will.€€On€January€4,Ð ¦*ö%) Ð2000,€Mr.€Price€entered€into€an€antenuptial€agreement€with€Cynthia€Ô_ÔFortenberryÔ_Ô,€who€upon€herÐ ’+â&* Ðmarriage€to€Mr.€Price€on€January€7,€2000,€became€Mrs.€Cynthia€Ô_ÔFortenberryÔ_Ô€Price.€€Unfortunately,Ð ~,Î'+ Ðthis€was€a€marriage€of€very€short€duration€as€Mr.€Price€died€August€12,€2001€as€a€result€of€beingÐ j-º(, ÐÑzlÑâ âÑ8€@rXXdìdÈ8Ñâ âÑ  ÑÔ_Ôstruck€by€lighting.€Ð ° Ðà ½ àShortly€after€Mr.€Priceððs€death,€Charles€B.€Burns,€Jr.€who€was€appointed€the€personalÐ œì Ðrepresentative€of€Mr.€Price€by€his€will,€filed€a€petition€for€probate€of€Mr.€Priceððs€will€and€forÐ ˆØ Ðissuance€of€letters€testamentary.€€This€petition€was€filed€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Marion€CountyÐ tÄ Ðwhich€exercises€probate€jurisdiction.€€On€August€16,€2001,€the€trial€court€admitted€Mr.€PriceððsÐ `° ÐLast€Will€and€Testament€and€First€Codicil€for€probate€and€issued€letters€testamentary.€€Mrs.€PriceÐ L œ Ðthereafter€filed€a€motion€for€revocation€of€letters€testamentary€on€August€29,€2001,€alleging€thatÐ 8 ˆ ÐMr.€Price€was€a€resident€of€Alabama€and€was€not€domiciled€in€Marion€County,€Tennessee.€Ð $ t ÐShould€Mrs.€Price€prevail,€the€Marion€County€Chancery€Court€would€be€without€jurisdiction€toÐ  ` Ðprobate€Mr.€Priceððs€will.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà ½ àThe€Price€Estate,€thereafter,€moved€to€strike€Mrs.€Pricesðð€motion€for€revocation€of€lettersÐ Ô$  Ðtestamentary€alleging€that€she€lacked€standing€to€bring€the€motion.€€The€Estate€makes€its€claim€byÐ À  Ðasserting€that€Mrs.€Price€has€no€beneficiary€interests€under€Mr.€Priceððs€will€as€she€waived€herÐ ¬ü  Ðrights€as€a€surviving€spouse€by€entering€into€the€January€4,€2000€antenuptial€agreement.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà ½ àMrs.€Cynthia€Price€has€also€initiated€litigation€in€Tennessee€seeking€to€invalidate€theÐ pÀ Ðantenuptial€agreement.€€This€litigation€is€not€part€of€these€proceedings,€but€that€litigation€providesÐ \¬ Ðsome€understanding€for€the€underlying€reasons€for€this€contest.€€It€appears€that€there€is€aÐ H˜ Ðsignificant€difference€between€Alabama€and€Tennessee€law€in€the€rights€of€a€surviving€spouseÐ 4„ Ðwho€dissents€from€the€will€of€their€deceased€partner.€€In€a€marriage€of€this€short€duration,€Mrs.Ð  p ÐPrice€would€enjoy€significantly€more€property€rights€under€Alabama€law€than€in€Tennessee.€Ð  \ ÐTherefore,€the€domicile€of€Mr.€Price€would€have€a€significant€relationship€to€the€choice€of€lawÐ øH Ðapplicable€to€Mrs.€Priceððs€rights€should€she€be€successful€in€invalidating€the€antenuptialÐ ä4 Ðagreement.Ð Ð  ÐÌà ½ àOn€December€13,€2001,€the€trial€court€conducted€a€hearing€on€Mrs.€Priceððs€standing€andÐ ¨ø Ðon€the€issue€of€Mr.€Priceððs€domicile€at€the€time€of€his€death.€At€the€conclusion€of€that€hearing€theÐ ”ä Ðtrial€court€issued€a€decision€concluding€that€Mrs.€Price€in€fact€had€standing€to€challenge€theÐ €Ð Ðissuance€of€the€letters€testamentary€and€determined€that€the€decedent€was€domiciled€in€MarionÐ l¼ ÐCounty,€Tennessee.€€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà ½ àMrs.€Price€initiated€an€appeal€as€a€matter€of€right€under€Tenn.€R.€of€App.€P.€3(a).€€ThisÐ 0"€  Ðappeal€was€objected€to€by€the€estate.€€However,€by€prior€order€of€this€court€we€waived€any€lack€ofÐ #l! Ðfinality€and€held€that€the€appeal€may€proceed.€€This€determination€is€consistent€with€Tenn.€CodeÐ $X" ÐAnn.€ðð€30„1„107€as€the€Legislature€has€determined€that€disputes€over€the€issuance€of€LettersÐ ô$D # ÐTestamentary€are€certainly€entitled€to€appeals€before€the€final€winding€up€of€an€estate€as€they€runÐ à%0!$ Ðto€the€determination€of€the€jurisdiction€of€the€court€to€entertain€the€matters.€€Also,€Tenn.€CodeÐ Ì&"% ÐAnn.€ðð€30„2„315(b)€recognizes€the€special€nature€of€probate€cases€and€provides€for€appeals€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðorders€resolving€claims€against€the€estate€without€waiting€for€the€entire€estate€to€be€settled.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐòòCantrell€v.€Estate€of€Cantrellóó,€19€S.W.3rd€842,€844€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999).Ð )à$( ÐÌòòà@ll'Æàò òISSUESóóó óˆÐ h+¸&* Їà ½ àThe€issues€for€consideration€and€determination€in€this€case€are€whether€the€court€erred€inÐ ° Ðfinding€that€Mrs.€Price€had€standing€to€contest€Mr.€Priceððs€domicile€and€whether€the€trial€courtÐ œì Ðerred€in€finding€Harley€Timothy€Price€to€be€domiciled€in€Tennessee.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà@××&Æàòòò òDECISIONó óˆÐ `° ÐóóÌà ½ àOur€review€of€this€case€with€respect€to€the€trial€courtððs€legal€conclusions€is€de€novo€withÐ 8 ˆ Ðno€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòPremium€Fin.€Corp.€of€Am.€v.€Crump€Ins.€Servs.,óó978€S.W.2d€91,Ð $ t Ð93€(Tenn.€1998);€òòStein€v.€Davidson€Hotel€Co.,€óó945€S.W.2d€714,€716€(Tenn.€1997);€òòPendleton€v.Ð  ` ÐMills,€óó73€S.W.3d€115,€120€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001);€òòBrown€v.€Ogle,€óó46€S.W.3d€721,€726€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ü L  ÐApp.€2000);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).òòÐ è 8  ÐóóÌà@··&Æàòòò òSTANDINGˆÐ À  Ðóóó óÌà ½ àThe€trial€court€ruled€that€Mrs.€Price€had€standing€to€challenge€the€issuance€of€the€lettersÐ ˜è  Ðtestamentary€for€her€husbandððs€estate.€€In€articulating€the€courtððs€reasoning,€the€court€reflectedÐ „Ô  Ðupon€the€fact€that€there€was€an€antenuptial€agreement,€the€validity€of€which€had€not€beenÐ pÀ Ðdetermined.€€Therefore,€the€court€concluded€that€basically€until€the€determination€of€the€validity€ofÐ \¬ Ðthe€antenuptial€agreement€has€been€made,€Mrs.€Price,€as€the€lawful€surviving€spouse€of€theÐ H˜ Ðdecedent,€has€a€tangible€interest€in€the€estate€sufficient€to€give€her€standing€at€least€to€question€theÐ 4„ Ðjurisdiction€of€the€court€to€probate€the€will.€€In€concluding€the€courtððs€ruling€the€court€reflectedÐ  p Ðthat€it€is€not€its€responsibility,€at€this€juncture,€to€determine€the€validity€of€the€antenuptialÐ  \ Ðagreement€in€advance.Ð øH ÐÌà ½ àStanding€is€a€judicial€doctrine€that€limits€court€access€to€those€who€have€a€justiciable€Ð Ð  Ðclaim.€€These€are€claims€in€which€the€law€recognizes€a€remedy€and€parties€who€have€a€real€interestÐ ¼  Ðin€that€remedy.€€òòKnierim€v.€Leatherwood,€óó542€S.W.2d€806,€808€(Tenn.€1976).€€This€doctrine€isÐ ¨ø Ðbased€on€the€concept€that€ð ððð[a]€court€may€and€properly€should€refuse€to€entertain€an€action€at€theÐ ”ä Ð[insistence]€of€one€whose€rights€have€not€been€invaded€or€infringed.ðððð€òòMayhew€v.€Wilderóó,€46Ð €Ð ÐS.W.3d€760,€767€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001)€(quoting€59€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòParties€óóðð€30€(1978)).€€In€orderÐ l¼ Ðfor€a€party€to€show€that€he€has€standing,€he€must€demonstrate€ð ða€distinct€and€palpable€injury[,]ðð€aÐ X ¨ Ðcausal€connection€between€the€injury€and€the€challenged€conduct,€and€a€remedy€available€toÐ D!” Ðaddress€the€injury.€€òòIn€re€Youngblood,óó€895€S.W.2d€322,€326€(Tenn.€1995);€òòMetro.€Air€ResearchÐ 0"€  ÐTesting€Auth.,€Inc.€v.€Metro.€Govððt€of€Nashville,€óó842€S.W.2d€611,€615€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);Ð #l! ÐòòMorristown€Emergency€and€Rescue€Squad,€Inc.€v.€Volunteer€Dev.€Co.,óó€793€S.W.€2d€262,€263Ð $X" Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€€Therefore,€when€determining€if€a€party€has€standing,€the€focus€of€theÐ ô$D # Ðinquiry€is€on€the€party€to€determine€whether€the€party€has€a€sufficient€personal€stake€in€theÐ à%0!$ Ðproceedings,€not€the€merits€of€the€partyððs€claim.€€òòMayhew,€óó46€S.W.3d€at€767.€€The€likelihood€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðsuccess€of€a€partyððs€claim€has€no€bearing€on€the€partyððs€standing.€€òòMetro.€Govððt€of€Nashville,€óó842Ð ¸'#& ÐS.W.2d€at€615.€€With€these€authorities€in€mind,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€judge€correctly€assessedÐ ¤(ô#' ÐMrs.€Priceððs€standing.€€Mrs.€Price€is€the€surviving€spouse€of€Mr.€Price€and€until€the€validity€of€theÐ )à$( Ðantenuptial€contract€is€determined,€Mrs.€Price€has€all€the€rights€associated€with€that€status.€€ThoseÐ |*Ì%) Ðrights€include€the€right€to€dissent€from€the€will€and€to€seek€her€statutory€share€of€the€estate.€€Ð h+¸&* ЇÌà ½ àThe€legislature€has€provided€that€antenuptial€agreements€are€enforceable€in€Tennessee€ifÐ œì Ðthose€agreements€are€entered€into€freely,€knowledgeably,€and€in€good€faith€by€the€parties.€Tenn.Ð ˆØ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€36„3„501.€€ð ð[T]he€spouse€seeking€to€enforce€an€antenuptial€agreement€must€prove,Ð tÄ Ðby€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€either€that€a€full€and€fair€disclosure€of€the€nature,€extent,€andÐ `° Ðvalue€of€his€or€her€holdings€was€provided€to€the€spouse€seeking€to€avoid€the€agreement,€or€thatÐ L œ Ðdisclosure€was€unnecessary€because€the€spouse€seeking€to€avoid€the€agreement€had€independentÐ 8 ˆ Ðknowledge€of€the€full€nature,€extent€and€valueðð€of€those€holdings.€€òòRandolph€v.€Randolphóó,€937Ð $ t ÐS.W.2d€815,€817€(Tenn.€1996).€€Therefore,€pending€the€conclusion€of€the€antenuptial€litigation,Ð  ` ÐMrs.€Price€has€a€marital€interest€that€is€subject€to€subsequent€termination€if€the€antenuptialÐ ü L  Ðagreement€ultimately€is€determined€to€be€valid.€€This€present€interest€is€sufficient€for€standing€toÐ è 8  Ðcontest€the€domicile€of€Mr.€Price€and,€therefore,€the€jurisdiction€of€the€court.€€This€assignment€ofÐ Ô$  Ðerror€is€overruled.€€Ð À  Ðà ½ à€€òò€óó€€ò òòòÐ ¬ü  Ðà@¶¶&ÆàDOMICILEóóó óˆÐ ˜è  ÐÌà ½ àð ðððDomicileðð€[of€a€person]€is€defined€as€the€place€ððwhere€a€person€has€his€principal€homeÐ pÀ Ðand€place€of€enjoyment€of€his€fortunes;€which€he€does€not€expect€to€leave,€except€for€a€purpose;Ð \¬ Ðfrom€which€when€absent,€he€seems€to€himself€a€wayfarer;€to€which€when€he€returns,€he€ceases€toÐ H˜ Ðtravel.ðð€€òòSnodgrass€v.€Snodgrassóó,€357€S.W.2d€829,€831€(quoting€òòWhite€v.€Whiteóó,€3€Head€404,€40Ð 4„ ÐTenn.€404€(1859));€òòTyborowski€v.€Tyborowskióó,€192€S.W.2d€231,€231€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1945).Ð  p ÐDomicile€of€a€person€within€a€state€establishes€an€important€legal€relationship€between€the€personÐ  \ Ðand€that€particular€place.€€It€ð ðimplies€a€nexis€between€[the]€person€and€place€of€such€permanenceÐ øH Ðas€to€control€the€creation€of€legal€relations€and€responsibilities€of€the€utmost€significance.ðð€Ð ä4 ÐòòWilliams€v.€North€Carolinaóó,€325€U.S.€226,€229€(1945).€€One€of€the€many€relationships€that€areÐ Ð  Ðestablished€by€domicile€is€the€location€of€the€appropriate€place€to€probate€the€will€and€administerÐ ¼  Ðthe€estate€of€a€deceased€person.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€32„2„101€provides€subject€matter€jurisdictionÐ ¨ø Ðto€the€probate€court€ð ðof€the€county€where€the€testator€had€the€testatorððs€usual€residence€at€the€timeÐ ”ä Ðof€the€testatorððs€death€.ðð€€Although€the€statute€speaks€of€the€residence€of€the€deceased,€this€statuteÐ €Ð Ðhas€been€consistently€construed€as€meaning€the€domicile€of€the€deceased.€€òòSvaboda€v.€Svabodaóó,Ð l¼ Ð454€S.€W.2d€722,€727,€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1969).€€ÛÛÜÜÛÛThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€interpreted€Tenn.Ð X ¨ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€32„2„101€to€require€that€a€testator€must€have€been€domiciled€in€Tennessee€before€aÐ D!” ÐTennessee€court€would€have€jurisdiction€for€the€original€probate€of€the€testatorððs€will.€€òòSvoboda,óóÐ 0"€  Ð454€S.W.2d€at€727.Ð #l! ÐÌà ½ àDomicile€and€residence,€although€at€times€used€interchangeably,€are€not€synonymous.€Ð ô$D # ÐTennessee€courts€have€long€recognized€the€distinction€between€oneððs€legal€residence€or€domicileÐ à%0!$ Ðand€a€residence,€meaning€a€personððs€place€of€abode.€€òòDenny€v.€Sumner€County,€óó184€S.W.€14,€16òòÐ Ì&"% Ðóó(Tenn.€1915)òò;€In€re:€Clayton,€óó914€S.W.2d€84,€89€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€In€addition,€our€courtsÐ ¸'#& Ðhave€held€that€ð ða€person€may€have€two€or€more€residences€but€only€one€domicile.ðð€òòBearmanóó€òòv.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐCamatsosóó,€385€S.W.2d€91,€93€(Tenn.€1964);€òòMiddle€Tennessee€Elec.€Membership€Corp.,€v.€StateÐ )à$( Ðex€rel.€Adams,€óó246€S.W.2d€958,€959€(Tenn.€1952);€òòDenny,€óó184€S.W.òò€óóat€16.òò€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà ½ àóóThe€court€in€òòDennyóó€provided€that€the€two€important€elements€in€determining€a€personððsÐ ° Ðdomicile€are€(1)€the€presence€of€a€person€within€a€state€and€(2)€the€intent€of€making€that€place€theÐ œì Ðpersonððs€domicile.€€òòDenny,€óó184€S.W.òò€óóat€16.òò€€óóIn€addition,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€recognizedÐ ˆØ Ðthat€a€person€ð ðmay€have€an€actual€residence€in€another€State€or€county.€€He€may€abide€in€the€latterÐ tÄ Ðwithout€surrendering€his€legal€residence€in€the€former,€provided€he€so€intendsòò.ðð€€Id.óó€The€courtÐ `° Ðfurther€stated€that€ð ð[h]e€may€not€actually€abide€at€his€legal€residence€at€all.ðð€€òòId.€óó(quoting€òòTipton€v.Ð L œ ÐTipton,€óó8€S.W.€440,€441€(Ky.€1888));€òòLong€v.€Ryan,óó30€Gratt.€718€(Va.€1878).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà ½ àAlthough€intent€alone€is€not€sufficient€to€establish€domicile,€intent€plus€some€type€ofÐ  ` Ðaction€is€sufficient.€€òòSvoboda,€óó454€S.W.2d€at€727;€òòTyborowski,€óó192€S.W.2d€at€233.€The€record€inÐ ü L  Ðthis€case€establishes€that€Mr.€Price€declared€that€he€was€a€resident€of€Tennessee€in€his€SeptemberÐ è 8  Ð1998€Last€Will€and€Testament€and€in€the€1999€Codicil€to€that€will.€€Mr.€Priceððs€marriage€licenseÐ Ô$  Ðlists€his€address€as€309€North€Cedar,€South€Pittsburg,€Tennessee.€€He€consistently€filed€his€federalÐ À  Ðincome€tax€returns€using€his€Tennessee€address.€€His€vehicles€were€€registered€in€Marion€County,Ð ¬ü  ÐTennessee€and€when€Mr.€Price€died,€he€possessed€a€valid€Tennessee€driverððs€license.€€EvidenceÐ ˜è  Ðwas€received€by€the€trial€court€to€the€effect€that€during€this€brief€marriage€the€Prices€hadÐ „Ô  Ðexperienced€periods€of€marital€separation€and€that€Mr.€Price€spent€significant€periods€of€time€inÐ pÀ ÐTennessee.€€In€addition,€he€was€registered€to€vote€in€Tennessee,€owned€a€house€in€Gatlinburg,€andÐ \¬ Ða€commercial€building€in€South€Pittsburg€which€contained€sleeping€quarters.€€Furthermore,€thereÐ H˜ Ðis€evidence€in€the€record€that€at€least€at€times,€Mr.€Price€resided€at€the€log€cabin€located€in€SouthÐ 4„ ÐPittsburg,€Tennessee.€€Although€Mrs.€Price€presented€evidence€that€Mr.€Price€had€a€residence€inÐ  p ÐBryant,€Alabama,€this€was€not€shown€to€be€the€òòonlyóó€residence€of€Mr.€Price€or€that€his€intent€was€toÐ  \ Ðmake€Alabama€his€domicile€of€choice.€Ð øH ÐÌà ½ àIn€most€instances,€domicile€is€presumed€to€follow€residence,€however€actual€residence€isÐ Ð  Ðmerely€one€factor€and€is€not€conclusive.€€òòHussey€v.€Jackson,€óó766€S.W.2d€184,€187€(Tenn.€1989).€Ð ¼  ÐThe€testimony€provided€to€the€trial€court€indicates€that€Mr.€Price€had€two€residences,€one€inÐ ¨ø ÐBryant,€Alabama€and€one€in€South€Pittsburg,€Tennessee.€€In€this€case,€Mr.€Priceððs€actions€andÐ ”ä Ðintentions€effectively€demonstrate€both€the€presence€and€intent€elements€required€for€a€finding€thatÐ €Ð Ðhe€was€domiciled€in€Tennessee.€òòDenny,€óó184€S.W.òò€óóat€16.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€that€the€record€inÐ l¼ Ðthis€case€effectively€rebuts€any€presumption€created€by€the€court€in€òòHusseyóó€and€that€the€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðproperly€determined€that€Mr.€Price€was€domiciled€in€the€State€of€Tennessee€at€the€time€of€hisÐ D!” Ðdeath.€€òòHussey,€óó766€S.W.2d€at€187.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà ½ àWith€these€findings€we€determine€that€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€should€be€affirmed€and,Ð $X" Ðtherefore,€that€the€Marion€Chancery€Court€is€vested€with€jurisdiction€to€proceed€with€the€probateÐ ô$D # Ðfor€Mr.€Priceððs€will€based€on€their€determination€of€his€being€a€Marion€County€domiciliary.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÌà ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u àò ò_____________________________________Ð ¤(ô#' Ðà ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u àó óJ.€S.€DANIEL,€JUDGEà Õ à