FUNDAMENTAL DISTINCTIONS 7 



are determined by the law of the place of domicile of the 

 owner. l 



At common law the legal proceedings necessary to re- 

 cover land were essentially different from those necessary 

 for the recovery of movables. Although the procedure 

 has been harmonized by statute to a large extent, yet actions 

 regarding land must generally be brought in the jurisdic- 

 tion where the land is situated; but this rule is not appli- 

 cable to actions as to movables. 2 



1. Minor, Conflict of Laws, Sec. 13; Dicey, Conflict of Laws (Am. Ed.) 72; Freke v. 

 Lord Carbery. L. K. l(i Eq. 401. (The distinction here made between mov- 

 ables and immovables is not the same as that between real and personal prop- 

 erty.) See Sec. of Tiffany Modern Law Real Prop., Chicago 1912, disap- 

 proving of decision in Despard v. Churchill, 5.'! N. V. 192. 



2. 3 IJ1. Com. 294: Brantley, Pers. Prop.. Sec. 7: Notes to Moctyn v. Fabrigas, 

 1 Smith's Lead. Cases 052: MeCionigle v. Atchison, 33 Kan. 726, Finch's 

 Cas. 05. 



