Unanue, Matter of

CourtSuperior Court of New Jersey
Writing for the CourtMARTIN J. KOLE
Citation255 N.J.Super. 362,605 A.2d 279
Decision Date16 November 1970
PartiesIn the Matter of the Settlement of the Accounts of Joseph UNANUE and Frank Unanue, Trustees Under the Trust Agreement Dated

Page 362

255 N.J.Super. 362
605 A.2d 279
In the Matter of the Settlement of the Accounts of Joseph
UNANUE and Frank Unanue, Trustees Under the Trust Agreement
Dated November 16, 1970, as Amended, By and Among Prudencio
Unanue, as Grantor, and Prudencio Unanue, Joseph Unanue and
Anthony Unanue, as Trustees of Sixteen Trusts Thereunder.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division,
Probate Part, Bergen County.
Decided Dec. 4, 1991.

[605 A.2d 280]

Page 364

Crummy, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, Newark (Michael R. Griffinger), for plaintiffs-beneficiaries.

Martin T. Durkin (Durkin & Boggia, Esqs.), guardian ad litem, for Jorge Unanue, plaintiff-beneficiary.

Quirk & Gallagher, Cresskill (Patrick Quirk), for Joseph Unanue and Frank Unanue, individually, as executors of the Estate of Prudencio Unanue, and as Trustees under the aforesaid trusts.

Saiber, Schlesinger, Satz & Goldstein, Newark (David M. Satz, Jr.), for intervenor--Goya Foods, Inc.

Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi & Stewart, Roseland (Jan Brody), for defendant--Charles Unanue.

MARTIN J. KOLE, J.A.D. (retired and temporarily assigned on recall).

This is a truncated version of a 147 page opinion dealing with the matter of domicile.

Part I contains a summary of the factual findings of the court.

Part II contains selected excerpts from the court's opinion.

[605 A.2d 281] PART I

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The issues in this case relate to the domicile of decedent, Prudencio Unanue on two dates: (1) November 16, 1970, the date he executed, in Brooklyn, New York, an inter vivos

Page 365

revocable trust agreement, under which the ultimate beneficiaries were his grandchildren and the corpus was his majority ownership interest in the then issued and outstanding shares of stock of Goya Foods, Inc.; and (2) March 17, 1976, the date of his death in Puerto Rico. Prudencio also executed a will on November 16, 1970, in Brooklyn, New York, which was probated on August 11, 1976 in Bergen County, New Jersey.

Prudencio's wife was Carolina. Residing with Prudencio and Carolina for much of the time involved in this action was Carolina's sister, Ana Maria. Prudencio and Carolina had 4 sons: Charles, Joseph, Frank and Anthony, all of whom were active in the Goya businesses and were the sole shareholders of corporations that the court found were Goya-related businesses in Puerto Rico, including Puerto Rico Foods Corp. and Caribbean Canneries Inc. Anthony died on March 23, 1976, six days after Prudencio's death. In view of Anthony's death the executors under Prudencio's will and the trustees under the trust essentially were Joseph and Frank.

After a dispute with his father and brothers, in June 1969, Charles was ousted as an officer, director and employee of all of the companies, including Goya. Charles remained a shareholder. Thereafter, extensive litigation ensued, with Charles on one side and his father and brothers on the other. The litigation was settled twice, as a result of which in 1972 and 1974, Charles' interests in the family-related companies were purchased by the other parties for in excess of $4,300,000 and he agreed never to contest the Will or the Trust. This amount was paid in full in 1975.

In this action, Charles contends that his father Prudencio's domicile at all times was in Puerto Rico and not Bergen County, New Jersey; and that, in any event, his domicile became Puerto Rico when he and Carolina left for Puerto Rico in November 1970 and remained there without leaving for New Jersey from that date until his death in March 1976. If Puerto Rico was Prudencio's domicile, Charles claims that under its laws, he is

Page 366

entitled to part of the Goya shares of stock as a forced heir of Prudencio and a beneficiary under his mother Carolina's will of her community property interest therein.

The court, after detailed factual and legal findings, concluded that Prudencio was domiciled in Tenafly, New Jersey on both dates--November 16, 1970 and March 17, 1976, when he died.

In those findings, the court determined that:

Prudencio came to Puerto Rico from Spain in 1904. He started a business venture in San Lorenzo in 1908 and became friendly with Ramona Falero there, who later claimed he was the father of her child Augusto, born in 1911. He believed, whether correctly or not, that Augusto was his son. In 1911 he became engaged to Carolina, who was residing in San Lorenzo. In 1916, he left for the continental United States, learned English and graduated from a business school in Albany, New York. He then worked and resided in New York City. He returned to San Lorenzo to marry Carolina in 1921. He left Puerto Rico alone soon after his marriage in order to earn a livelihood in the New York City area.

In 1923 and 1924 first Carolina and then Charles, their son (who had been born in Puerto Rico while Prudencio was in New York), joined Prudencio in Brooklyn. Prudencio continued to work in New York City and resided in Brooklyn with his wife and child from 1924 to 1929. Joseph and Anthony were born in Brooklyn. In August 1929, Prudencio and his family moved to New Jersey, residing in a rented house in Ridgefield Park, in which Frank was born; soon thereafter Carolina's sister, Ana Maria, and her brother, Pepe, left Puerto Rico to reside with the family.

In 1934, all of them moved to a rented house in Bogota, which was purchased in [605 A.2d 282] Carolina's name in January, 1937. They lived in this house for 28 years, from 1934 to 1962. All of the sons were raised there, went to school in Bergen County, and throughout their attendance at college and military service and until their marriages, resided with their parents in Bogota.

Page 367

While in Bogota in 1946 and 1956, Prudencio and Carolina, respectively, became naturalized United States citizens. Neither Prudencio nor Carolina visited Puerto Rico from 1923, when Carolina came to live with Prudencio in Brooklyn, until some 26 or 27 years later--in 1949 or 1950.

The Goya company and business was founded by Prudencio in or about 1936, although he was in business for himself in New York City since 1929. Goya's headquarters were moved from Manhattan to Brooklyn in 1958. It again moved, while Prudencio was ill in Puerto Rico, in December 1974, to Secaucus, New Jersey.

With Prudencio's impetus and money, in 1949, his son Charles purchased a cannery in Puerto Rico. Prudencio was then 64 years of age. This served as the nucleus for the formation and operation of the two Puerto Rican businesses. Prudencio had no ownership interest in these businesses. They were owned by his 4 sons. But he was the "boss" of Goya and the Puerto Rican enterprises. By 1969, Charles had become Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer of all of the companies, including Goya. But, as indicated, Charles was dismissed from these positions in the companies in June 1969.

Commencing in the late 1950's, Prudencio and Carolina, who then resided in Bogota, New Jersey, began routinely to spend the winter months of each year in Puerto Rico--usually from some time in November of each year (generally after Thanksgiving in Bogota) until March or April (generally around Easter) of the following year.

Prudencio's winter visits to Puerto Rico were primarily taken because of pain and discomfort caused by an arthritic condition which began in the 1940's and forced him to walk with a cane by the mid-1950's. During the 1960's, Prudencio's arthritic condition worsened further, and he obtained motorized wheelchairs which he used to travel around the company offices both in New York and in Puerto Rico. The cold New Jersey winters exacerbated the pain resulting from his arthritis. Additionally,

Page 368

he was afraid he might fall on the ice or snow during the New Jersey cold weather. Prudencio, who was 70 years old in 1956 and 80 years old in 1966, used his trips to Puerto Rico to escape these winters.

While in Puerto Rico, during the 20 years of annual visits there, Prudencio and Carolina would usually stay in various residences (generally apartments) owned or leased by a Puerto Rico company owned by their sons. None of them was owned or leased by Prudencio or Carolina. The apartments varied. Among others, there was a one-room efficiency apartment and an apartment over a retail store.

The last of these company apartments in Puerto Rico was located at 54 Kings Court, Santurce in a building known as Condominium Ashford Park (sometimes "Kings Court apartment"). This apartment was purchased on November 11, 1966 and owned by Charles, who ultimately, in November, 1968, sold it to the Puerto Rico company.

The New Jersey houses of Prudencio and Carolina were larger and far more comfortable than the apartments in Puerto Rico in which they stayed during their winter visits.

In July 1962, Prudencio and Carolina moved from the Bogota residence to a ranch style one-level house at 13 North Summit Street in Tenafly, New Jersey. Prudencio's move from Bogota to Tenafly was prompted by his desire not to climb stairs any longer as a result of his severe arthritic condition.

Prudencio and Carolina enjoyed their New Jersey houses and considered them as home. Prudencio showed the houses with pride to his friends and visitors. He and Carolina were deeply interested in their family--their sons and spouses and their grandchildren. The naturalization papers of Prudencio and Carolina stated that they resided in Bogota, New Jersey. The [605 A.2d 283] grandchildren, from time to time, visited at the Bogota and Tenafly houses with and without their parents. Most of them were located in the New Jersey area or in places readily accessible thereto. Some of them stayed over on weekends or

Page 369

longer. They played with children of neighbors, both in Bogota and Tenafly. Prudencio enjoyed talking to them and watching them play.

Prudencio and Carolina's valuables and sentimentally significant possessions (such as silver, jewelry and prayer books)...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Goya Foods, Inc. v. Wallack Management Co., No. 01-1928.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • May 17, 2002
    ...of Accounts of Unanue, 311 N.J.Super. 589, 710 A.2d 1036 (N.J.Super.Ct.App.Div.1998); In re Settlement of Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J.Super. 362, 605 A.2d 279 (N.J.Super. Ct. Law Div.1991). This chapter arises out of a matched set of interlocutory orders entered by the district court with a......
  • Salek v. Passaic Collegiate School, I-XIV
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • April 14, 1992
    ...no support for plaintiff's assertion that Hazelwood required defendant school officials to exercise greater censorship over the content[605 A.2d 279] and/or style of the yearbook. The picture neither represented an invasion of the rights of others nor an interference with the school's missi......
  • McNeill v. Estate of Lachmann
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • November 13, 1995
    ...taxes are paid on the occupant's behalf." (emphasis added) N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1. As Judge Kole noted in In re Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J.Super. 362, 374, 605 A.2d 279 (Law Div.1991) (quoting Kurilla v. Roth, 132 N.J.L. 213, 215, 38 A.2d 862 (Sup.Ct.1944)), "[d]omicile" is def......
  • Raab v. Dep't of Cmty. Affairs, DOCKET NO. A-0419-16T1
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • May 14, 2018
    ...an intention to remain at the premises, and an abandonment of the previous domicile, see In re Settlement of Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J. Super. 362, 376 (Law Div. 1991), aff'd, 311 N.J. Super. 589 (App. Div. 1998), the RSP and RREM establish an objective test for determining the applicant'......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Goya Foods, Inc. v. Wallack Management Co., No. 01-1928.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • May 17, 2002
    ...of Accounts of Unanue, 311 N.J.Super. 589, 710 A.2d 1036 (N.J.Super.Ct.App.Div.1998); In re Settlement of Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J.Super. 362, 605 A.2d 279 (N.J.Super. Ct. Law Div.1991). This chapter arises out of a matched set of interlocutory orders entered by the district court with a......
  • Salek v. Passaic Collegiate School, I-XIV
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • April 14, 1992
    ...no support for plaintiff's assertion that Hazelwood required defendant school officials to exercise greater censorship over the content[605 A.2d 279] and/or style of the yearbook. The picture neither represented an invasion of the rights of others nor an interference with the school's missi......
  • McNeill v. Estate of Lachmann
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • November 13, 1995
    ...taxes are paid on the occupant's behalf." (emphasis added) N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1. As Judge Kole noted in In re Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J.Super. 362, 374, 605 A.2d 279 (Law Div.1991) (quoting Kurilla v. Roth, 132 N.J.L. 213, 215, 38 A.2d 862 (Sup.Ct.1944)), "[d]omicile" is def......
  • Raab v. Dep't of Cmty. Affairs, DOCKET NO. A-0419-16T1
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • May 14, 2018
    ...an intention to remain at the premises, and an abandonment of the previous domicile, see In re Settlement of Accounts of Unanue, 255 N.J. Super. 362, 376 (Law Div. 1991), aff'd, 311 N.J. Super. 589 (App. Div. 1998), the RSP and RREM establish an objective test for determining the applicant'......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT