Question

What are your insights about the case of Paul Ceglia VS Mark Zuckerberg (CEO of Facebook) case?

Answer 1

Ceglia V. Zuckerberg (2011)

FACTS: Facebook is a social media company that was founded by Mark Zuckerberg in 2004. Zuckerberg is the founder, chairman, and CEO of Facebook. Paul Ceglia is suing Zuckerberg for a breach of contract, pursuant to the terms of a 2003 contract between Zuckerberg and himself. Plaintiff believes he owns eighty-four percent interest in defendant Facebook, INC. He claims that both he and the defendant are domiciled in New York. Zuckerberg opposes the motion and claims that his domicile is in California.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Plaintiff Paul Ceglia brought the case in front of the New York Supreme Court asserting a breach of contract claim against Zuckerberg and Facebook, Inc. Defendants removed to federal court due to the diversity of jurisdiction. Plaintiff files a motion to remand claiming that diversity is lacking because he and Zuckerberg are both domiciled in New York, where Zuckerberg’s parents reside. Zuckerberg opposes the motion and claims that his domicile is in California.

ISSUE: Did Zuckerberg change his domicile to California before the date that the action was filed?

HOLDING: Yes, Zuckerberg’s domicile is in California. Plaintiff’s motion to remand is denied.

REASONING: The objective indicators to determining domiciliary intent include current residence, voting registration, location of personal property, membership in clubs, unions, churches, etc., and drivers license. Zuckerberg resides in California, he has no other residences, he does not own any real property in California or New York, he purchased a car and registered it in California, has paid taxes in California, has a California driver’s license, has bank and brokerage accounts in California, and is the founder and CEO of a corporation in California. Based on the totality of the circumstances, the court finds Zuckerberg’s Domicile to be California.

RULE OF LAW: In cases questioning domicile the law presumes that a prior domicile will continue until a change has occurred. To determine the domicile, the court looks at the following information conclusively and the determination is based on the totality of the circumstances:

Current residence; voting registration and voting practices; location of personal and real property; location of brokerage and bank accounts; membership to unions, organization, and churches; employment or a business, and automobile registration and drivers license.

KINDLY RATE THE ANSWER AS THUMBS UP. THANKS A LOT.