of law when her brother had moved her from New York to New Jersey to receive custodial care. In re Estate of Gillmore, 101 N.J.Super. 77, 243 A.2d 263, 270 (App.Div.), cert. denied, 52 N. J. 175, 244 A.2d 304 (1968). The court found for practical purposes the incompetent person resided permanently in New Jersey; maintained no other residence; had severed ties with her former home; and came to New Jersey to spend the remainder of her life. These “unique” circumstances led the court to conclude a change in domicile had been effected. Moreover, the court held additionally, as her duly qualified personal representative acting in good faith, the brother had legal capacity to effect a change in her domicile. Id. See also In re Kassler, 173 Misc. 856, 19 N.Y.S.2d 266, 269 (Sup.Ct. 1940) (<HOLDING>). Únless an appointing court holds to the
holding that a change of venue has no affect on the applicable state law and that change of venue is but a change of courtrooms recognizing in dicta that the case before it involving an individual and not an entity did not involve a recent change of domicile by the party in question and a similar case brought immediately after the partys arrival in the united states following a long period of domicile in the country where the bankruptcy is pending would likely lead to a different result recognizing the validity of a maryland judgment holding that domicile actual residency in the jurisdiction and notice of the divorce suit are sufficient enough to establish personal jurisdiction over an absent party thereby providing a basis for a collateral custody determination holding court cannot change custody without showing that change is in best interests of child recognizing a change in domicile based on the principle a guardian of an incompetent person acting in good faith has the rightto permanently change the wards domicile to another jurisdiction unless the court having control over the ward objects