A New Era of Cross-Border Litigation
Texas courts are facing more cross-border disputes today than at any other moment in the state’s history. Every week, judges and litigators encounter Mexican civil documents, addresses registered across different Mexican states, contracts executed abroad, and families whose lives move fluidly between two very different legal systems. And yet one of the most fundamental legal concepts—domicile—is often misunderstood the moment Mexican law enters the courtroom.
This article is designed for Texas judges and litigators seeking practical clarity on how Texas common law interacts with Mexican civil law—a federal system in which each of Mexico’s 32 states maintains its own civil code and its own body of family legislation. Drawing from my work as a professor at the University of Guadalajara, located in the state of Jalisco, I use the Jalisco Civil Code solely as a representative example, not because it is unique, but because it clearly illustrates how domicile functions within Mexico’s state-based civil-law framework.
This is not an academic abstraction. It is a response to what happens inside Texas courtrooms every day, where Texas Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 308b and Texas Rules of Evidence Rule 203 increasingly require courts to analyze, interpret, and sometimes apply foreign law, including Mexican civil law. When Mexican domicile is relevant to jurisdiction, service of process, marital property characterization, probate venue, or parent-child matters, a Texas court cannot default to Texas concepts. It must determine what Mexican law actually provides.
If you have ever handled a family, probate, or civil dispute involving someone born in Mexico, with property or roots in Mexico, or whose life crosses the border regularly, this article is written for you.
Why “Mexican Domicile” Is Often Misunderstood in Texas Courts
One of the most common misconceptions in Texas litigation is the assumption that Mexico has a single, unified civil code. It does not. Mexico is a federal republic, and like the United States, each state—Jalisco, Nuevo León, Chihuahua, Puebla, Sonora, and the rest—has its own civil code, drafted and enacted at the state level.
Despite these differences, the civil-law logic behind domicile is remarkably consistent across Mexico: a codified, statute-driven approach rather than a caselaw-driven one. Jalisco serves as a clear example to illuminate how the concept of domicile operates throughout Mexico.
Three major distinctions separate conceptions of domicile in Mexico and Texas:
- Mexico uses a statutory civil-law structure; Texas uses common-law interpretation.
- Mexican law contains legal presumptions, such as a six-month residence presumption.
- Mexican law recognizes “conventional domicile,” including electronic addresses contractually designated by the parties.
These differences are often overlooked when a Texas court evaluates domicile under Mexican law.
Domicile Under the Jalisco Civil Code (as a Representative Model of Mexico)
Although every Mexican state has its own civil code, Jalisco’s provisions provide a clear and representative example of how domicile is defined and applied across Mexico.
Statutory Definition (Art. 72)
Domicile is established through a structured hierarchy:
- The place where a person resides with the intention to remain;
- If not applicable, the place of their principal business; and
- If neither applies, the place where the person is found.
This differs significantly from Texas’s intent-based, common-law approach.
Six-Month Presumption of Domicile (Art. 73)
A person who resides in a place for more than six months is presumed domiciled there unless they formally declare otherwise.
Texas has no statutory presumption comparable to this.
Legal Domicile Categories (Art. 75)
Certain individuals have domicile assigned by operation of law:
- Minors;
- Persons under guardianship;
- Public servants on assignment;
- Military personnel; and
- Individuals deprived of liberty.
Conventional Domicile (Art. 76)
Parties may legally designate any address, including an electronic address, as binding for notices, obligations, and the exercise of rights.
Texas does not recognize this concept.
Domicile Under Texas Law: A Common-Law Interpretation
Texas applies a flexible judicial test requiring:
- Physical presence and
- Intent to make a place a permanent home.
Texas law has:
- No duration requirement;
- No statutory presumption;
- No conventional domicile; and
- No formal process for declaring or disputing domicile.
This framework works internally but becomes problematic when dealing with individuals whose domicile is governed by a codified civil-law system.
Where Texas Courts Go Wrong: The Cross-Border Gap
1. Treating Mexican domicile as if it were Texas domicile: Intent does not function the same way under civil law as it does under Texas common law.
2. Ignoring the six-month presumption: In Mexican law, this is not merely a fact—it is a legal consequence.
3. Overlooking conventional domicile: Contractually designated domiciles, including electronic addresses, may determine venue, notice, and enforcement in Mexico.
4. Failing to apply Texas Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 308b and Texas Rules of Evidence Rule 203 correctly: Rule 308b requires Texas courts to evaluate the enforceability of judgments and arbitration awards based on foreign law in cases involving marriage or parent-child matters. Rule 203 instructs courts on how to receive, interpret, and apply foreign law when properly raised.
When domicile is governed by Mexican law, Texas courts cannot rely on instinctual common-law reasoning.
Practical Guidance for Texas Judges and Litigators
1. Identify which Mexican state’s law applies: There is no single “Mexican Civil Code.”
2. Use expert testimony or certified legal analysis: Rule 203 anticipates this.
3. Apply Mexican statutory presumptions correctly: Intent does not automatically override a civil-law presumption.
4. Examine contracts for conventional domicile clauses: This may control notice, venue, and enforcement.
5. Recognize that domicile impacts jurisdiction, family law, estate matters, and civil disputes, particularly in transnational families.
Randall Villa is an attorney licensed in Mexico and serves as an expert witness on Mexican family law in Texas courts. His work focuses on cross-border family law disputes between Texas and Mexico. He holds a doctorate in human rights and is a professor at the University of Guadalajara. Villa is also a Texas-certified mediator and process server. He can be reached at dr.randallvilla@gmail.com.
Great Job Randall Villa & the Team @ Texas Bar Blog for sharing this story.
