Free Essay

Conflict of Laws Paper

In: Other Topics

Submitted By qwertyuiop12345
Words 5639
Pages 23
Traditional Approaches to Horizontal Choice of Law

(introduction/Class 1 = Keeton v Hustler)
Keeton v Hustler Discusses procedural v substantive inquiry Mentions 5 CoL considerations: predictability; relationships among the states; simplification; forum interests; sounder rule approach

I. What are we looking for in a CoL system? Examples
a. Predictability [for litigants]
b. Uniformity
c. Ease of application
d. Respect for state sovereignty (vested rights largely looks to this)
e. Respect for state policy
f. Justice for parties
g. Party expectations
h. Better law
II. Domicile
a. Def: includes mutual obligation between state and individual
b. State of domicile at death is controlling law
i. Standard: Mined + left behind →
1. Abandoned (physical travel to new domicile) + manifested intent to remain
2. Note: objective + subjective elements
c. Test established in White v Tennant (WV 1888)
i. Family farm extends over WV/PA borders; husband went to WV on same property to care for wife, planned on going back on the same day ii. H: PA law controls iii. Note: siblings still live in WV, may be favoring forum even though the court doesn’t seem to be….still is room to play
d. Test maintained in Maksym v Board of Election Comm’rs of City of Chicago (BB…Rahm Emanuel Case)
i. *Once a domicile is established, presumption that you retain it until you create a new domicile ii. Rejects interpretation of “actually lived” iii. Intent is unclear (including to Rahm)…may just be following opportunity iv. Maybe: domicile can be different for different purposes
III. Torts (territoriality)
a. First view (Story) = territoriality
i. Exclusive jurisdiction within events that happen within one’s own territory ii. Focus on voluntary nature→comity/cooperation
b. Next (Beale) = vested rights [same outcome]
i. Lex loci delicti: law of place where the last bad act occurs applies ii. Pros/Cons (from found outline)
1. Pros:
a. Often easy to apply
b. Predictable
c. Lex loci often only common geographic factor to both parties (not in Carroll thoruhg)
d. Party neutral
2. Cons:
a. Lacks values of flexibility/common sense that may result in unfair treatment
b. For defamation suits (other intentional torts): tortfeasor may be able to select the state to commit tort w/ an eye towards potential liability….forum shopping
c. How to apply traditional methodology: 2 steps:
i. 1: ask what relevant person/place/event happens? ii. 2: localize it
1. nb: place of injury is tough to localize in defamation (where is reputation located? There are different parts to it: personal/emotional/business)
a. where is a pseudonym located?
d. Alabama Great Southern RR Co v Carroll (AL 1892)
i. F: RR; chain links broke; injury
1. Interests:
a. MS: place of injury
b. AL: plaintiff –ee; D RR corp; negligence ii. MS law applies because the injury occurred in MS, so that’s where the rights vest
e. Pros: ease of application + clarity (often tough to localize negligence)
f. [3] Exceptions to where injury occurs standard (she blew through these, not totally sure)
i. acted in A on reliance of As law and goes into B ii. same, w/ legal obligation in A, + causes injury in B iii. vicarious liability for an –ee and –er liabile under B law if a worker goes into B not at –er’s discretion
IV. Contract
a. Vested rights for K: law at the place of contracting (making)
i. i.e. K’s validity is determined by the law of the state in which the K is made; if K is valid there, it’s valid everywhere and an action on the K is sustained even in a state that doesn’t recognize the K
b. Place of formation: Milliken v Pratt
i. Wife in MA binds husband to a ME K that was sent through the mail ii. Uncertainty about what constituted performance
1. Res of Conflict of Laws §332 (1934) [pp21-22]= K validity (vs §358 = performance)
c. State interest is less when parties have = bargaining power
d. From K…did parties have a justified expectation that the K would be enforced?
e. Exception: question of the manner of Performance, and not just the duty to perform
i. → then law of place of performance applies ii. Louis-Dreyfus (she discussed this with us in class; K signed in MN for shipper to take wheat from MN to Montreal, via Ontario…one ship sank btwn Montreal + Ontario)
1. Conflict: common law held shippers liable; USA statute held no liability for shippers exercising due diligence, but only if one port in USA; Canada statute also held no liability for shippers exercising due diligence
2. H (Hand): Canada law applies to K as place of performance
a. Because sinking involved the manner of performance, and not the duty to perform (which would be place of formation)
f. Unclear line as to whether it’s a performance issue
V. Property
a. Traditional rule: real property…situs → law of state where property sits applies (Barrie’s)
i. Situs rule is strong enough that it may constitute an exception to FF&C (Barrie’s)
b. In re Barrie’s Estate (IA 1946)
i. F: Barrie (IL) has land in IA, and devises it to an IA church and others. Will was in an envelope marked “VOID.” ii. QP: Was this an effective revocation of will?
1. IL: yes, and court disposed of property under IL intestacy law
2. IA: no iii. H: IA law controls, so no recovation, and property goes to IA church
1. Even though IA statute says that execution of will is controlled by state of execution—b/c revocation is different, statute doesn’t apply iv. Dissent: should be treated as a probate case, not a property case
v. IA court basically exercises the real property ‘exception’ to FF&C
c. Dépeçage: where different issues within a case may be governed by the laws of separate states
i. May be unpredictable b/c it’s at court’s discretion whether or not to dissect
1. Disfavored, but not prohibited, tool
d. Wills: writing a choice of law provision may ameliorate some complication w/r/t decedent expectations
e. Movable property:
i. In the context of a will:
1. Governed by law of decedent’s domicile ii. ‘movable property’ not in the context of a will (e.g. deed, gift)
1. situs rule applies at time of transfer (Cammell)
2. → rule is not so straightforward, as shown by Shanahan. iii. Cammell v Sewell (Ex Ch 1860) p29 n5
1. F: Cargo shipped on Prussian vessel from Russia to England; the ship wrecks in Norway. Shipmaster sells off goods in Norway; purchaser resells it to an English merchant; English cargo insurers sue English purchasers to get the cargo back
2. H: Norwegian buyer innocent, so no liability under Norweigen law
a. → First sale + innocent purchaser
i. → for personal property, law of the place of transfer controls iv. Shanahan v Landers (1st Cir 1959) p30 n6
1. Property sold in IL on credit to MA buyer; buyer uses it in NH and becomes involvent, so sells it to bona fide purchaser, who goes to VT where the seller then repossesses it
2. H: Place of repossession controls
f. Other vested rights rules:
i. Estates: law of place of decedent’s domicile at time of death ii. Corporation’s internal affirs governed by laws of place of incorporation
1. Note that corporate form isn’t relevant if corporation is simply a party to litigation and case isn’t about internal affairs iii. Marriage: law of place of celebration governs questions of marriage validity iv. Family issues: marital domicile place
VI. Escape Devices:
a. Characterization: which of the vested rights rules applies? → some cases fall into multiple categories (e.g. torts and Ks), so picking one can lead to different (more desirable?) outcomes
i. E.g. Levy—tort (car accident) or K (rental car) {Ct 1928}
1. F: Rental car company rents a car to Sack, who gets into an accident in MA with passenger Levy in car
a. Conflict: how do you characterize this dispute?
i. Tort: place of accident (MA)—no recovery possible ii. K: place of formation (CT)—statutory recovery from rental car company for negligence
b. Court holds this is a K case, so CT law applies
i. Levy + public are third-party beneficiaries of the K btwn Sack and Daniels ii. Note: seems like a good-faith characterization…not results-oriented ii. E.g. Haumschild (Wisc 1959)
1. Husband and wife (WI) get into a car accident in CA
2. Conflict: how to characterize
a. Tort: Place of injury (CA)—no recovery possible by wife against husband (interspousal immunity)
b. [other]: WI law allowed wives to sue in husbands in tort
3. H: WI law applies, b/c this is about family law [not as a question for the court]
a. Not consistent with what was done in the past iii. E.g. Barrie—property or probate? (???????)
b. Substantive v. Procedural
i. Procedural: apply the law of the forum (Keeton) ii. Substantive: a choice-of-law question iii. Forum law decides how to characterize something (Grant v. McAuliffe) iv. Rules pertaining to the remedy (vs the right) are procedural? (Kilberg)
1. Grant v. McAuliffe (Cal 1953)
a. F: Several CA residents get in car accident in AZ, lawsuit not filed until after one of them dies
b. Conflict: whether survival of a cause of action is procedural or substantive
i. AZ: cause of action not filed before death doesn’t survive ii. CA: cause of action survives death of P
c. H: survival is akin to SoL → procedural
i. So, action maintained
v. SoL: Bournais v Atlantic Maritime (p55) (2d Cir 1955)
1. did not read this case
2. note that Harlan determines SoL to be procedural
a. b/c:
i. says SoL generally governs a wide body of cases (procedural), and doesn’t ii. deal with a complex, complete system of laws (substantive—e.g. workers comp) vi. Which SoL applies?
1. Traditionally (1st Res) = follow forum state
2. 2nd Res = presumption in favor of shorter SoL
3. Uniform Act = if you pick foreign law, must take forum SoL
4. Today: 2/3 states dropped assumption that if procedural → up for grabs
c. Public Policy
i. Embodied in First Restatement ii. Holdover from comity/territorialism—needed an escape hatch iii. Definition (Loucks)
1. Menace to public welfare
2. Offend sense of justice iv. Examples of public-policy exceptions
1. Allowing a wife to sue husband in tort (Mertz)
2. Damages cap (Kilberg)
a. But see Loucks (damages cap OK)
v. Not examples of public-policy exceptions
1. Nazi Contracts (Holzer) vi. Cases:
1. Loucks v Std. Oil Co. (N.Y. 1918) p70
a. NY resident was in a fatal accident in MA; negligently caused by Ds employees (also NY)
b. Conflict: common-law didn’t allow for wrongful death recovery
i. MA: statute allowed recovery with $10k cap ii. NY: statute allowed recovery with no cap, but only for accidents in NY
c. H: (Cardozo) MA law applies (place of injury) because it doesn’t conflict with the public policy of NY
i. → it does not offend sense of justice or menace public welfare ii. NY follows same principles, so no conflict
1. …mere differences in remedy doesn’t count where same principles followed
2. Mertz v Mertz (NY 1936) p73
a. Wife sues husband (both NY) for injuries sustained in an accident in CT
b. Conflict: which law applies?
i. CT: allows recovery ii. NY: doesn’t allow recovery by wife against husband (interspousal immunity)
c. H: CT law (place of injury) offends public policy of NY, thus NY law applies
i. NY law places a ‘disability’ upon the wife, and a foreign state can’t remove this disability
1. Re: what is a valid cause of action?
3. Holzer v Deutsche Reichsbahn (NY 1938) p75
a. Employment K btwn P and D corporation (both German) provided for liquidated damages if P was terminated
i. D fires Jewish P under Nazi Nuremberg Laws, and thus aren’t responsible for breach of K under German Law
b. H: German law applies (place of K formation) because it is not offensive to public policy of NY
i. Enforcing a K made according to law of place of formation is not offensive to public policy (respect for sovereignty over people)

MODERN APPROACHES

I. Party Autonomy
a. Goal: Try to respect the expectations of parties to make private law
i. Presumption of validity of K (Pritchard) ii. Differentiate state interest in validity of K versus no state interest in interpretation of terms? (Siegelman)
b. Toughest Q = adhesion Ks
c. Where do we stand?
i. Courts willing to give parties’ latitude even if it moves beyond vested rights [though not complete latitude]
d. Cases
i. Pritchard v Norton (SC 1882) p97
1. Pritchard (LA) signed a bond on behalf of a railroad in LA state court, for which Norton (NY) agreed to indemnify Pritchard by K (NY)
a. RR loses the suit, Pritchard pays, and then sues Norton for indemnification
2. Conflict: which law applies
a. NY: indemnification K is void b/c no consideration was given
b. LA: K valid b/c Pritchard’s pre-existing liability as surety was sufficient consideration
3. H: LA law applies, K is valid
a. Party expectations: they couldn’t have contracted contemplating a law that would defeat the K formation
i. SO→ this is an exception to the general rule of place of formation (doesn’t make a real decision….just shifts focus to intention)
b. Vested rights: place of performance (LA)?
c. Shows presumption of validity in determining choice of law for K
4. Potentially lasting issue: assumes that parties intend K to be valid.
a. Adhesion Ks? ii. Siegelman v Cunard (2d Cir 1955) p99
1. P is injured on a cruise ship, and the ticket/K says all actions must be brought within 1 year per English law
a. P contacts D within the year, but they say don’t file the suit because they wil work out a settlement
b. Settlement talks break down, and he sues after expiration of the year
2. Conflict: which law applies?
a. English law: strict bar on cause of action
b. NY law: suit can be maintained b/c of estoppel and tolling statutory period
i. Note: NY interest in protecting its citizens is usually less re interpretation than establishing validity of Ks
3. H (Harlan): English law applies in interpreting the K—dismiss the suit
a. Party expectations through provision in the K-
4. Dissent (Frank) notes that NY law is what enables the choice-of-law provision in the K to control in the first place, so this is bootstrapping
II. Interest Analysis
a. Currie’s 1958 article
b. Evaluated Milliken with the married woman’s right to K
i. Make a table of all permutations, and note that only 4 cases are true conflicts ii. Only Cases 2, 9, 10, and 14 are cases in which advancement of one’s state interest necessarily subordinates the other state’s interest iii. → See Sopan outline for charts and insights
c. Issues:
i. Requires courts to evaluate purposes of laws—including foreign laws
1. Gives very little guidance
2. Separation of powers issue?
3. OTOH, courts do this evaluation all the time (e.g. Marek v Chesney, evaluating FRCP 68 v § 1983) ii. Ignores party expectations and party interests iii. Not forum-neutral
d. Applying Currie’s Interest Analysis
i. First ask: what is the purpose of the two laws? What is state trying to achieve? ii. False conflicts: (4,5,8,12,13)
1. Find purpose of law, and if one state’s interests aren’t impeded upon by applying the other state’s law→ false conflict
2. E.g. purpose of guest statute is to protect insurers, so no interest if parties are out of state (Tooker)
3. E.g. purpose of NY law is to protect medical providers and state welfare, so no interest if victim is from NJ (Schultz)
4. Cases
a. Tooker v Lopez (NY 1969) p136
i. Car accident (MI) involving MSU students (both from NY and MI), in a car registered and insured in NY ii. Conflict: which law applied?
1. MI guest statute: required gross negligence for recovery in wrongful death suits
2. NY: no guest statute, allowed recovery iii. H: NY law applies
1. MI has no interest b/c purpose of MI statute is to protect insurers against false claims, not to prioritize claims of non-guest victims—thus abandons Dym rule (that >1 purpose per law); (says just 1 purpose for each law)
2. NY has an interest in protecting and compensating its resident victims
3. No such thing as party expectations in tort cases (nobody expects an accident
4. Fuld concurrence: wants to create meta-guides for how this should be handled iv. Dissent (Breitel) would stay with Dym, especially since the MI victim cant recover while the NY ones can
b. Schultz v. Boy Scouts (NY 1985) p143
i. NJ family sues Boy Scouts (NJ, but since moved to TX) for abuse by a scoutmaster on a camping trip in NY ii. Conflict: which law under interest analysis?
1. NJ: charitable tort immunity
2. NY: no such immunity iii. H: NJ law applies under interest analysis, b/c false conflict
1. NJ interest is loss-allocating: protect and promote charities; hold domiciliaries to domestic law obligations
2. NY interest is conduct-regulating (limited interest): protect medical providers from unpaid bills; prevent people from becoming wards of state; deter charities from bad behavior
3. So….no NY interest is implicated b/c everyone is from NJ, whereas NJ interests are only vindicated by applying NJ law
4. Also mentions that the alternative rule would lead to forum shopping (how?) iv. Dissent: calculates the interests differently saying NY has an interest in preventing/deterring abuse within its borders
1. Note: this isn’t a clean false conflict…interests can go multiple ways
c. Babcock v Jackson (NY 1963) p149 n1, p136cite
i. NY residents in a NY car get into accident in Ontario ii. Court held that ON guest statute sought to protect insurers against fraud, so recovery permitted under NY law
d. Dym v Gordon (NY 196x) p137 cite
i. NY residents, in NY car, get into CO accident (also involving some Co residents) ii. H: CO guest statute sought to protect insurers and also to prioritize claims of non-guest victims
1. Thus, found that CO law applied to preclude recovery by NY victims
2. → there exist >1 purpose for a law (Tooker doesn’t agree) iii. True conflicts: (2,9,10,14)
1. if a true conflict, then there is no principled way to pick→ there are a few options (the first 2 are different iterations of Currie’s thought):
a. Currie’s original proposal: pick forum law (Lilienthal)
b. Adopt a restrained interpretation of forum law and see if the conflict disappears (Bernkrant)
c. Evaluate comparative impairment of each state if the other state’s law is chosen (Bernhard v. Harrah’s)
d. Apply vested rights?
2. → 2 other ancillary ways to deal with true conflicts
a. Kavers – principals of preference (in notes)
i. Gives guidance through rules (territoriality with slant towards fairness)
b. Kramer’s approach – rule-based; focus on laws involved, not territories (statute/common law/time of statute enactment, etc) e.g. sophisticated rock-paper-scissors
3. Cases
a. Interests Analysis – true conflicts Lilientham v Kaufman (Ore. 1964) p160
i. D (OR) was declared a spendthrift under OR law, and couldn’t legally enter into a K
1. Regardless, Ks with CA resident, who then sues to enforce it and get paid ii. Conflict:
1. OR: spendthrift law invalidates K
2. CA: no such law, so K valid iii. H: Forum (OR) law applies, because this is a true conflict, so no way to resolve through interest analysis
1. OR interest: protect families from unintended debts; protect state funds for public assistance
2. CA interest: enforce K; protect citizen creditors
3. Ct explicitly rejects public policy exception [i.e. vested rights escape hatch] for CA law, and adopts OR law b/c true conflict iv. Dissent: OR law is weird (questionable and rare) and shouldn’t control when a conflict arises
b. Interests analysis: restrained Bernkrant v Fowler (Cal. 1961) p168
i. NV residents enter into an oral K where D agrees to forgive Ps debts in his will, if P gives him money today.
1. D then moved to CA, dies there before he forgives Ps debts in his will ii. Conflict:
1. NV law: statute of frauds (real property provision) doesn’t apply to provisions re money payment secured by real property, so debt is forgiven
2. CA law: statute of frauds does apply, so K is void and estate can collect iii. H: NV law applies because this is a false conflict
1. CA law to enforce K or invalidate them only applies to CA Ks (interest)
a. CA interest: Protect ppl from fraud
b. NV: enforcement of oral Ks
2. NV has greater interest (though both interests would be furthered by applying their law)—moderate and restrained approach to CAs interest
3. Party expectations were that NV law would apply; can’t let one party change the law by moving unexpectedly
4. A restrained interpretation of forum law to change a true conflict into a false one
c. Interest analysis—comparative impairment Bernhard v Harrah’s Club (Cal. 1976) p172
i. CA residents, responding to NV casino advertisements placed along CA highways, drove to NV to gamble there
1. NV club’s –ees serve them booze; accident in CA on way back with another CA resident ii. Conflict:
1. CA: imposes liability for serving alcohol to visibly drunk patrons (dram shop liability…crim + civil)
2. NV: exempts tavern owners from such liability iii. H: CA law applies in this true conflict situation
1. CA interest: protect victims/ppl on highways
2. NV interest: economic; protect tavern owners iv. → Under comparative impairment, NV is impaired less b/c it already imposes criminal punishment on tavern owners, so extra civil penalty is not a big deal
1. by contrast, CA interest is significantly impaired if immunity is conferred to preclude recovery iv. Unprovided-for case
1. 3,7,11,15→ neither state has an interest
2. not much consensus w/ how to deal with these
3. Currie had 4 thoughts: more human, protect parties, defect to forum law, ___
4. Erwin v Thomas (Or 1973) p153
a. P (WA) was injured in WA by D (OR)—Ps wife sued D for loss of consortium, allowed in OR, not in WA
b. If neither state has an interest, forum law is applied b/c of convenience, administerability
c. If forum is committed to interest analysis:
i. Apply the law that is more enlightened or humane ii. Apply the law that aids local litigant iii. Treat foreign claimants as they would be treated in their own state iv. Law of the forum* (best)
III. Second Restatement
a. Overview:
i. Presumption re applicable state law (most= vested rights) ii. Unless another state has a more significant interest
1. → provides a multi-factor test
b. Application: (p200-01)
i. What kind of case are you dealing with?
1. Characterize the issue (tort, K, property, etc)
a. Use forum law for characterization (§7)
2. Find the applicable subsection and follow the instructions to find the presumptive law to apply
3. Then apply the seven §6 factors to see if the presumption is overcome by a state with more significant contacts
a. Needs of interstate and international systems
b. Relevant policies of forum
c. Relevant policies of other interested states and relative interests of those states
d. Protection of justified expectations
e. Basic policies underlying the field of law
f. Certainty, predictability, and uniformity
g. Ease in determination and application of the law to be applied ii. Unless another state has a more significant relationship (kind of like a center-of-gravity test…..most significant relationship)
c. In practice, 2d restatement ends up looking a lot like interest analysis (e.g. Phillips v GM)
d. Cases
i. Phillips v GM Corp (Mont 2000) p205
1. Guy buys a truck in NC (originally sold by GM in NC), but then moves to MT
a. Driving from MT to NC, they get in a fatal accident in KS; son now lives in NC again and estate sues GM
2. Conflict:
a. MT: strict liability for products, with no dmgs cap
b. NC: (unclear)
c. KS: comparative negligence for products liability, with an ‘industry standard’ affirmative defense available
3. H: MT adopts 2d Res → MT law applies
a. Presumption begins with KS aw as place of injury
b. But KS interest is to protect residents and fee-shift—not implicated here with MT P and MI D
c. NC has an interest in the truck sale, but NC choice-of-law would mechanistically pick KS, so NC has no interest
d. MI has an interest, but MI courts wouldn’t apply their law extraterritoriality, so MI has no interest
e. → MT law applies, b/c they like to protect their residents ii. (K law) Wood v Walker Adjustment Bureau (Colo. 1979) p218
1. NM v CO→ properly licensed contractor to recover on unfinished K?
a. NM law has more significant relationship
i. But didn’t talk enough re: justified expectations
IV. Better Law/Choice-influencing (used by some, but not many states)
a. Five choice-influencing considerations (Leflar article…p224)
i. Predictability of results
1. Forum-neutrality
2. Respect for parties’ bargained-for choices ii. Maintenance of interstate and international order
1. Could be read as an invitation to interest analysis iii. Simplification of judicial task
1. This is why procedural rules are governed by forum law
2. This also weeds out false conflicts iv. Advancement of forum’s governmental interests
v. Application of the better rule of law, which includes
1. Law that makes the best socio-economic sense for the times
2. Justice in the individual case
3. Protection of justified expectations of parties
b. Better law in practice
i. MN court finds that MN common law is better than ON guest statute (Milkovich) ii. NH’s lengthy defamation SoL better than other states’ (Keeton) iii. Cf. Jepson, where MN court finds that neither MN law allowing stacking or ND law disallowing it is better than the other
c. Guest statutes: pros/cons
i. Insurance collusion, carpooling in rural areas, environmental concerns
d. Problems with better law standard:
i. People might have different metrics for how to determine ‘better’
e. Cases
i. Milkovich v Saari (Minn. 1973) p227
1. A lot of ON residents get into car crash on a day trip to MN
a. One victim hospitalized in MN
2. Conflict
a. ON has a guest statute barring recovery
b. MN does not
3. H: MN law applies under five choice-influencing considerations
a. First three are irrelevant (predictability; maintenance of interstate order; simplification of jsutidical task)
b. Forum interest is to administer justice—but court doesn’t look to purpose of statutes or interest of ON
c. Better law (justice in the individual case; fairness; equity) points to MN law
4. Note: strong state movement away from these guest statutes support tidea that guest statutes aren’t better law ii. Jepson v Gen. Casualty Co. (Minn. 1994) p232
1. P (MN) travels to AZ, where he has a car accident; then attempts to collect on his underinsured motorist provision
a. P lived near ND border, had a ND company, purchased ND auto insurance policy through MN broker on seven cars
2. Conflict:
a. ND: doesn’t allow “stacking” of underinsured coverage policies
b. MN: does allow stacking
3. H: ND law applies under the five Leflar fators
a. Predictability: both a tort (no predictability) and K case, so the K part favors predictability (seems like parties expected MN law to apply based on their negotiations) → ND law favoring
b. Interstate order: P was forum-shopping in MN
c. Simplification of judicial task: not relevant
d. Forum interest: MN interest is to compensate victims, but also to uphold K
e. Better law: neither law is better (just different)—so can’t simply choose forum law under this test → so, this factor not dispositive iii. Sopan discusses keeton v hustler here too
V. Renvoi
a. Definition and application
i. Apply other state’s whole law (both substantive law and choice-of-law rules) ii. But need to avoid infinite loop problems (e.g. Pfau) iii. Can be used to identify and eliminate false conflicts (e.g. NC law in Phillips)
1. Phillips: disregarding NC law based on fact that NC would have chosen KS law
b. First Restatement → apply renvoi when
i. Title to land (and related decrees) ii. Divorce decrees
c. Second Restatement → apply renvoi when
i. Disinterested forum, and all other forums would reach the same result ii. Where the choice-of-law rules dictate a result identical to that of an interested forum
1. One state has a clearly dominant interest—e.g. land
2. Urgent need for uniformity—e.g. testamentary gifts of movable property iii. (like in Phillips, this kind of looks like an escape device for judges to get where they want)
d. Case
i. Pfau v. Trent Aluminum Co. (NJ 1970), p246
1. P was a passenger in Ds car, and they get into an accident in IA, where both attended college
a. P from CT, D from NJ, car registered and injured in NJ
2. Conflict:
a. IA guest statute only allows recovery for gross negligence
b. CT has no guest statute, but follows vested rights choice-of-law
c. NJ has no guest statute, but follows interest analysis choice-of-law
3. H: NJ court applies interest analysis, and decides that CT law applies to allow recovery
a. Only applies CT substantive law (allowing recovery), not CT’s total law
b. CT’s vested rights may have pointed to IA, but it may have applied public policy exception
c. IA may have pointed back to CT or NJ under interest analysis
d. So to avoid renvoi problem, NJ would apply CT substantive (internal) law, but not CT’s total law (e.g. use NJ’s choice of law law)
VI. Rules vs Standards (need better notes on this)
a. Paul v National Life (W.Va 1986) p256
i. WV drivers, IN crash with guest statute—uses public policy escape hatch ii. Lex loci is applied—apply rules over standards, contemptuous of modern approaches
1. Looks towards trend in the law
2. Note that we might be moving towards a standards enactment iii. Used public policy exception b/c of the strong interest of WV to allow P to recover for negligence iv. Even when courts want to apply rules, they can tweak them to their own liking
VII. Complex Litigation
a. Uniformity of law
i. Courts will often seek uniformity to simplify MDL or class action proceedings (e.g. In re Air Crash; In re Agent Orange) ii. Only a problem with modern theories; vested rights would get around these issues
b. Case
i. In re Air Crash Disaster Near Chicago (7th Cir. 1981), p263
1. American Airlines airplane crashes just after takeoff from O’Hare
a. Passengers from various states and nations file various suits in IL, CA French judgment
3. (9th circuit en banc 6-5 ultimately reversed—3 judges for lack of p/j, 3 for lack of ripeness)

CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION/ the constitution and choice of law

Survey of states/students…condit/Clemens/twitter 1-3

(Territoriality)
I. Due Process
a. Notice and foreseeability
i. Early decisions focused on whether parties could reasonably foresee a certain law to apply ii. E.g. in era of vested rights, MO law cannot govern a NY contract (Dodge)
1. But perhaps Dodge was about substantive due process? iii. E.g. a bare forum cannot apply its law, because parties couldn’t have foreseen it (Dick) iv. E.g. if a state has ‘but a slight connection’ to the issue, these parties couldn’t foresee its law to apply (Delta & Pine)
v. → Three cases show transition:
1. Dodge focuses on liberty of K (all about place of K and place of performance)
2. Home Inc: naked forum, so unfair law to expose as due process
3. Delta + Pine: might have been ok if there was notice vi. Where do we stand?
1. Vested rights, unless strong state interest _ connection in Ks substance, so it wouldn’t be unreasonable to apply its law [DP violation]
b. Constitutionalization of vested rights?
i. Dodge, Dick, and Delta & Pine all seem to require vested rights (place of K formation) ii. But they (Brandeis) subtly make the shift towards state interests , hinting that if a state had sufficient interest in the matter, it could apply its law
1. Seems misplaced in DP, hence a shift to FFaC as well.
c. Cases
i. NY Life Ins. Co. v. Dodge (SCOTUS 1918), p316 n.2
1. MO resident buys policy from NY insurer, who then loans him $$ with policy as security
a. He dies, and insurer voids policy under NY law and applies it to loan balance
2. Conflict:
a. NY law: can void policies to cover debts
b. MO law: can’t void insurance policy to cover deceased’s debts
3. H: NY law applies
a. → law of formation of K is NY, and MO law conflicts w/ freedom of K protected by 14th amendment (Lochner)
4. Dissent (Brandeis): MO law isn’t unconstitutional even under strict scrutiny, b/c it leaves the loan debt intact ii. Home Ins. Co. v. Dick (SCOTUS 1930), p312
1. TX citizen living in MX, bought a boat in MX, insured it in MX from MX insurer
a. Boat is destroyed in MX, insurance K said suit had to be brought w/in 1 year
b. He moves back to TX and files suit against NY reinsurer after one-yr period
2. Conflict:
a. TX law: any K with…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Conflict Paper

...Individual Assignment 1.2 Conflict Paper Veronica S MGT450 9/1/2013 Conflict management in the workplace is a problem that all leaders, managers, and employees have to deal with at one time or another. The basic components of conflict management include improving communication, teamwork, and a systematic approach to resolving disagreements productively. While working as a human resources representative for the Benefits Department, the department was faced with some issues as our director was forced to leave the organization due to a personal conflict with the human resource executive director. After the director left, the department had no direction and the only support the human resource team had was the immediate supervisor. Unfortunately for everyone, including the supervisor, the executive director was targeting everyone that had ever worked with our former director. With the above mentioned, our supervisors' title changed as needed on a daily basis.  For example, if there was a need for the department’s expertise and knowledge, then she would be placed back in her position. Otherwise, she would be treated as one of the representatives. This became an emotional roller coaster for everyone involved as we did not feel supported and were very confused. Meanwhile, the executive director decided to name the payroll manager interim director to the Benefits Department which worsened the situation.   It became evident that this person had no benefits......

Words: 746 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Mgmt570 Work Conflict Paper

...Managing Conflict in Workplace Professor September 2012 Introduction I. Work Environment A. History of Bayou Sorrel Lock B. What we do and how. II. Background A. What is the conflict and how did it begin? 1. What parties are involved? a. What are their conflict handling styles? 2. Factors contributing to conflict a. Different cultures b. Communication failure B. What has been done to mitigate the conflict? i.i. What conflict handling modes have been utilized? i.ii. Which mode was most effective/ ineffective? III. Recommendations A. How to bring closure to the conflict 1. Communication 2. Team Work 3. Compromise IV. Reflection A. What I learned from this assignment. B. How I will integrate what I have learned into my daily work routine. V. References Introduction I am a Lock & Dam Operator at Lock & Dam structure in . A Lock & Dam Operator I operate electrically, electronically, and/or hydraulically controlled lock or lock and dam gates, control valves, and other associated equipment required for passage of a variety of private and commercial traffic through the lock structure. Work Environment Our structure is a part of the Operations Department within the of the US Army Corps of Engineers in South This paper will......

Words: 1935 - Pages: 8

Free Essay

Conflict Paper

...Conflict Paper Music conflict, two groups of musicians have different suggestions in music, or they had feuds between the two different cultures. Because of such reasons, they are having music conflict. Through my research from the book and network, I have known some historical background information about the conflict. Dmitri Shostakovich was regarded as an important composer in twentieth century. As his music was prohibited performance, Soviet condemned him twice. In 1930, Dmitri Shostakovich created a musical which name is “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District” and it had became a disaster of his music career. In 1936, after Stalin saw this musical, he said the content of this musical is not good and he did not conform to the standard. This musical escalates the crisis. At beginning, whether in Soviet or abroad, this musical was admired by audiences and critics. After Stalin saw it, most people rebuked it “vulgar, coarse”. Finally, in a short period, “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District” was forbidden to performance at public. Because of this, Dmitri Shostakovich’s other music works would be prohibited performance and his income is also reduced at the same time. It was not designed to be like that. In response to the matter, he created Fifth Symphony in 1937. At the same time, Dmitri Shostakovich found a job in Music College which let him have relatively stable income. “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District” is a musical opera.  It tells the story of a lonely woman in......

Words: 391 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Maritime Liens and the Conflict of Law

...Maritime Liens and the Conflict of Law - General Shipping and Regulatory Maritime Law Index 1. Purpose and plan of the essay page 3 2. Introduction 2.1 Origins of maritime liens page 3 2.2 Maritime liens page 3 3. Conflict of law page 5 4. The United Kingdom page 6 5. The United States page 8 6. Conclusion page 10 1. The purpose and plan of this essay I will start this essay with a first review of the background of maritime liens and their definition. After this, I will examine why there exist conflicts of law in maritime law. My purpose of this essay is to compare two states that are very different in their domestic maritime law in respect of maritime liens and the differences in recognizing foreign maritime liens. I have chosen to compare the domestic law in the United Kingdom with the United States because I feel that they are managing conflicts of law very differently from one another and I want to get a deeper knowledge in these states law. The American court recognizes foreign maritime liens while the United Kingdom do not; they apply the lex fori (i.e. their own law). This had caused a huge uncertainty in the right of the international ship suppliers. Because the states is so in-cohesive in this area of law I thought it would be interesting to compare these and see how they handle conflicts of law. I will bring out the weaknesses in the different systems and also the positive things. Finally, after this comparison I......

Words: 5125 - Pages: 21

Premium Essay

Law Paper

...A current law that impacts the delivery of human service is the Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act. HIPAA is an acronym for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. HIPAA is a law, which protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information. The HIPAA has rules and standards that help keep a patient‘s information private and safe. What reliable resources are available to learn about the implications of this law? Many reliable resources are available to help one learn more about this law. One can go to the HIPAA or the Human services website and find information on this law. One needs to know how to understand the health information. HIPAA provides a federal protection about patients information help by covered entities and gives patient’s the rights and respect to the information. Administrative, physical, and technical safeguards covered entities to ensure that the confidentiality, integrity of the patient health information is protected. The covered entities are one’s local doctor offices, clinics, dentist, pharmacies, chiropractors, and Nursing Homes. The purpose or rationale of this law is to improve efficiency in health care delivery, protection of confidentiality, and security of health information by setting and enforcing standards. This helps to keep the patient medical history private between the healthcare providers and patient. This means that no one can call and request the patient records without the patient’s......

Words: 969 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Conflict of Laws

...development of codified law within the European context has necessitated a call for the development and adoption of similar rules in other parts of the world in a bid to inform the departure from applying common law and other rules elsewhere. In your view, do you believe that there is a case for developing such codified rules in the Kenyan context? (15mks) The codification of laws is a way of domesticating laws and brings more certainty in the application of the laws since there will be a clear reference to which any dispute will be directed. Codification of private international law bring about two pronged arguments being the constant tension between the need for legal certainty and predictability, on the one hand, and the need for flexible, equitable, and individualized solutions, on the other. This brings to light the kind of discretion the judge has in matters touching on private international law leading to uncertainty and unpredictability. On the other hand, taking into account matters of comity, public policy and justice to the parties to the case, fixed rules that do not bear in mind the foreign element in the case can be a cause of in justice to either party since the dimensions, circumstances and exigencies of the particular cases need to be looked at on a case by case basis to achieve justice. A country risks jeopardizing a broader scheme of "unification" by crystallizing local or national rules of conflict. The legislature of Kenya is not a universal law......

Words: 870 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Conflict of Laws

...development of codified law within the European context has necessitated a call for the development and adoption of similar rules in other parts of the world in a bid to inform the departure from applying common law and other rules elsewhere. In your view, do you believe that there is a case for developing such codified rules in the Kenyan context? (15mks) The codification of laws is a way of domesticating laws and brings more certainty in the application of the laws since there will be a clear reference to which any dispute will be directed. Codification of private international law bring about two pronged arguments being the constant tension between the need for legal certainty and predictability, on the one hand, and the need for flexible, equitable, and individualized solutions, on the other. This brings to light the kind of discretion the judge has in matters touching on private international law leading to uncertainty and unpredictability. On the other hand, taking into account matters of comity, public policy and justice to the parties to the case, fixed rules that do not bear in mind the foreign element in the case can be a cause of in justice to either party since the dimensions, circumstances and exigencies of the particular cases need to be looked at on a case by case basis to achieve justice. A country risks jeopardizing a broader scheme of "unification" by crystallizing local or national rules of conflict. The legislature of Kenya is not a universal law......

Words: 870 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Law Paper

...Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803) Facts: Thomas Jefferson won the 1800 presidential election against John Adams. However, because he[Jefferson] did not take office until March 4th, 1801, President John Adams appointed Federalist judges and justices of the peace, called “Midnight Judges” to the court, one of which included William Marbury. Although these appointments were approved by the Senate, the commissions for some of these appointments were not delivered on time. Thus, the new president, Thomas Jefferson, declared the remaining appointments void. Constitutional Question: Is Marbury entitled to his commission? If he has a right to his commission, and that right has been violated, does the law of the country allow a remedy to Marbury? Is the Supreme Court the legal place for Marbury to ask for the aforementioned remedy? Answer: Yes, yes, and it depends. Justice John Marshall Delivered the Opinion of the Court The President of the United States appointed Mr. Marbury a justice of peace, and that the seal and signature by the Secretary of State signifies the completion of the appointment. Therefore, Marbury has legal right to the office. Marbury has a legal right to the commission which was not delivered to him. Therefore, his right to the office and commission was violated, and the country must allow him a remedy to correct this. Since Marbury is entitled to the remedy, the question would remain of whether or not a writ of mandamus (judicial method in......

Words: 704 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Tort and Conflict of Laws

...private international law is that if the tortious act has been committed entirely locally, then lex loci delicti governs it, irrespective of the fact that whether it has or has not some foreign element, such as, both or one of the parties is domiciled or resident abroad or national of another country. The foreign law is applicable only in some very exceptional situations. Torts in Common Law countries mean civil wrongs to a person, to property, or to a person’s reputation. Common examples are negligent acts causing injury or deaths, conversion, trespass to property and defamation. 1.2 Research Methodology: In making this project report the doctrinal method of research has been used. 1.3 Focus area: This project report focuses on the tort under private international law. 1.4 Scope of the study: In this project report the meaning of tort and law applicable to tort under private international law has been explained. CHAPTER 2 Conceptual Analysis 2.1 TORT AND CONFLICT OF LAWS: Torts in Common Law countries mean civil wrongs to a person, to property, or to a person’s reputation. Common examples are negligent acts causing injury or deaths, conversion, trespass to property and defamation. The same act may be both a tort and crime: assault can be a cause of action in tort and may also be a criminal offence. That is also true in some other situations, for example, misappropriation of property and (in India) defamation. Conflict of laws problems can arise......

Words: 3643 - Pages: 15

Free Essay

Maritime Liens in the Conflict of Laws

...MARITIME LIENS IN THE CONFLICT OF LAWS (final version published in J.A.R. Nafziger & Symeon C. Symeonides, eds., Law and Justice in a Multistate World: Essays in Honor of Arthur T. von Mehren, Transnational Publishers Inc., Ardsley, N. Y. 2002 at pp. 439-457) Prof. William Tetley, Q.C.* INDEX I. II. Preface - Homage to Arthur T. von Mehren Introduction - Maritime Liens 1) 2) III. Civilian origins of maritime liens Characteristics of maritime liens Maritime Liens as Sources of Conflicts of Law 1) 2) 3) The differing scope of "maritime liens" Other maritime claims Different ranking of maritime liens and claims IV. V. VI. VII. The United Kingdom - The Lex Fori The United States - The Proper Law Canada Some Other Jurisdictions 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) China Israel Greece Sweden The Netherlands VIII. The Rome Convention 1980 IX. * Conclusion Professor of Law, McGill University; Distinguished Visiting Professor of Maritime and Commercial Law, Tulane University; counsel to Langlois Gaudreau O'Connor of Montreal. The author acknowledges with thanks the assistance of Robert C. Wilkins, B.A., B.C.L., in the preparation and correction of the text. -2- MARITIME LIENS IN THE CONFLICT OF LAWS Prof. William Tetley, Q.C.* I. Preface - Homage to Arthur T. von Mehren I am honoured to contribute to Prof. Arthur von Mehren's festschrift. On occasion, I have leaned upon and even borrowed (with great benefit and I hope with complete citation), his writings and, for example,......

Words: 12945 - Pages: 52

Free Essay

Role of Conflict and Power Paper

...Role of Conflict and Power Paper Legally Blonde Legally Blonde is a movie which shows little variety in characters as all of the main characters presented are highly stereotypical and all are white males and females, who all are upper-middle class. This movie shows how sexism is rooted into society and it does absolutely nothing to challenge that with its characters. The men are all shown to have some form of a position of power whether in the work life or in their personal lives and relationships and use this power to get what they want. Women in this movie are seen to be there simply for the pleasure of the men, and placed in two categories which are mainly based on their appearance or the way they act. This movie is the story of Elle Woods, a very cute and friendly student who is also the most popular girl in her Los Angeles sorority. Elle has just finished her studies in Fashion and is getting prepared to marry her boyfriend, Warner, who will soon be going to Harvard Law School in Boston. Unfortunately, Warner, who is actually a somewhat superficial jerk, decides to break up with Elle, because he wants to find a more serious looking girlfriend who will help his career in politics after he gets out of law school. Although Legally Blonde does have many outstanding points in which the main character overcomes stereotypes and challenges she faces, there are many faults to the movie. Under any feminist movie list, it can be guaranteed the popular movie, Legally Blonde,......

Words: 1680 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Tort and Conflict of Laws

...ge » Other Topics Tort and Conflict of Laws In: Other Topics Tort and Conflict of Laws CHAPTER 1 An Introduction       1.1 Introduction: The peculiar feature that tort occupies in private international law is that if the tortious act has been committed entirely locally, then lex loci delicti governs it, irrespective of the fact that whether it has or has not some foreign element, such as, both or one of the parties is domiciled or resident abroad or national of another country. The foreign law is applicable only in some very exceptional situations. Torts in Common Law countries mean civil wrongs to a person, to property, or to a person’s reputation. Common examples are negligent acts causing injury or deaths, conversion, trespass to property and defamation.       1.2 Research Methodology: In making this project report the doctrinal method of research has been used.       1.3 Focus area: This project report focuses on the tort under private international law.       1.4 Scope of the study: In this project report the meaning of tort and law applicable to tort under private international law has been explained. CHAPTER 2 Conceptual Analysis       2.1 TORT AND CONFLICT OF LAWS: Torts in Common Law countries mean civil wrongs to a person, to property, or to a person’s reputation. Common examples are negligent acts causing injury or deaths, conversion, trespass to property and defamation. The same act may be both a tort and crime: assault can be a cause......

Words: 352 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Conflict of Law

...forms site from TopTenReviews. Visit Today!. Courts follow the traditional rule of lex loci delictus in determining which state’s substantive law is applicable to actions sounding in tort[i]. Lex loci delictus holds that the substantive law of the place where the tort occurs applies. It is a recognized principle of the law of the conflict of laws that the law of the state where an alleged tort is completed controls the liability[ii]. Where a tort is committed in one state and sued on in another, the lex loci delicti principle controls[iii]. In Williams v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 229 Conn. 359 (Conn. 1994), the court held that the substantive rights and obligations arising out of a tort controversy are determined by the law of the place of injury, or lex loci delicti. Thus, under the principle of Lex Loci Delicti, a court will determine the substantive rights of an injured party according to the law of the state where the injury occurred[iv]. The lex loci rule is derived from the vested rights doctrine[v]. According to the vested rights doctrine, a plaintiff’s cause of action owes its creation to the law of the jurisdiction where the injury occurred and depends for its existence and extent solely on such law. Thus, where the tortious act and the resulting injury occur in different states, the rule is that the substantive law of the state where the injury occur controls. Under the provision of the Federal Tort Claims Act which renders the U.S. liable for the......

Words: 748 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Conflict of Laws (Marriage)

...(marriage)2010] ILI Law Review 269 VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE AND CONFLICT OF LAWS Rajat Dosi Abstract Marriage, which is considered as one of the vital societal institutions to carry forth the society, may also now-a-days lead to conflict of law situation between two different countries. To tackle such a situation, every country has its own Private International Law rules. In Private International Law, the validity of marriage is dependent upon two things, formal and essential validity of marriage, for which every country has its own rules. In this paper, the first chapter deals with introduction to marriage and its relation with conflict of laws. The second chapter deals with formal validity of marriage and its position in different counties. The third chapter deals with essential validity of marriage and its position in various countries. The fourth chapter provides a comparative analysis of five different countries. The fifth chapter deals with Hague Convention and lastly, the sixth chapter deals with recommendations and suggestions. I. Introduction Marriage is a universal human institution which has formed the foundation of the family throughout history.1 It usually means a voluntary union for life of one man with one woman to the exclusion of others.2 While the traditions surrounding marriage ceremonies, the rights and obligations of marriage, the way of choosing one's marriage partner, and even who all are permitted to marry may differ from culture to culture.3 In......

Words: 6363 - Pages: 26

Free Essay

Conflict Style Paper

...My Conflict Style Paper Conflict Management Course Cody Cooper 6/25/2012 Introduction Over this past eight weeks we have all learned abundance about the different types of conflict and the various types of resolutions for those said conflicts. We did not just learn about conflict but we also looked into ourselves and our peers to see how exactly conflict intertwines with our own lives and how we deal with it on a daily basis. This paper is being written to show exactly what styles we use towards other people and how that looks to them and how it makes them see us. You will also read about some of my own personal examples of how I have ran into conflict and how I try and use my skills to the best of my ability to change the way it affects others and myself directly. I will include some of the information that was assessed by some peers and also the assessments completed by myself to show what I think of myself and what others see me as. Conflict is a problem for many either it be at school or at work but with the knowledge gained by the class, book, and assessments it makes it easier to find yourself changing to what is right. Body Along with this paper I did an assessment on myself and gave two others a peer assessment. When filling it out on myself I knew exactly what kind of person that I was and I scored a 5.36 on the Solution-Orientation part which was higher than the No confrontation and Control styles. When adding up the scores from the two peer......

Words: 1352 - Pages: 6

Nancy Ellen Shore | Continue Reading | Jekyll and Hyde