Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Editing Conflicts of Laws
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The principles of conflict of laws provide guidelines to determine whether a court of the forum jurisdiction will apply its law or the laws of another jurisdiction to a dispute.The purposes of these rules are (1) uniformity in results in their determination / predictability, and (2) to prevent forum shopping. | The principles of conflict of laws provide guidelines to determine whether a court of the forum jurisdiction will apply its law or the laws of another jurisdiction to a dispute.The purposes of these rules are (1) uniformity in results in their determination / predictability, and (2) to prevent forum shopping. | ||
=TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TO CHOICE OF LAW= | =TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TO CHOICE OF LAW= | ||
The below are all traditional '''substantive''' law | The below are all traditional '''substantive''' law approachesThe traditional system for choice of law in the United States was the system embodied in the 1<sup>st</sup> Restatement. Based on the '''vested rights theory'''. Some states still follow the 1<sup>st</sup> Restatement.'''Vested Rights Theory (BEALE)''': Alternative to comity. Foreign law could never operate outside the territory of the foreign sovereign. Rather, the forum’s use of foreign law could be explained in terms of the creation and enforcement of vested rights. Basically, when an event occurred in a foreign territory, a right was created. Because the only law that could operate in the foreign territory was the law of the foreign sovereign, the existence and content of any such right was determined by the foreign law. The forum court simply enforced the right which had vested in the foreign territory according to the foreign law. | ||
* Must know when and where a particular right vested b/c the law of the place where the right vested would control the content of the right | * Must know when and where a particular right vested b/c the law of the place where the right vested would control the content of the right | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==TORTS== | ==TORTS== | ||
APPLY THE PLACE OF THE WRONG (1<sup>st</sup> Restatement § 384)This is essentially where the injury occurred ('''''lex loci delecti'''''). The place of the wrong is in the state where the last event necessary to make an actor liable for an alleged tort takes place (§ 377). The rationale is that the plaintiff does not sue the defendant for the latter’s negligence, but because the negligence has caused the plaintiff harm. The tort is complete only when the harm takes place, for this is the last event necessary to make the actor liable for the tort.Exceptions''':''' | APPLY THE PLACE OF THE WRONG (1<sup>st</sup> Restatement § 384)This is essentially where the injury occurred ('''''lex loci delecti'''''). The place of the wrong is in the state where the last event necessary to make an actor liable for an alleged tort takes place (§ 377). The rationale is that the plaintiff does not sue the defendant for the latter’s negligence, but because the negligence has caused the plaintiff harm. The tort is complete only when the harm takes place, for this is the last event necessary to make the actor liable for the tort.Exceptions''':''' | ||
* Vicarious liability ( | * Vicarious liability (§378) of defendant for the acts of another is determined by the place of the wrong only if defendant authorized the person to act for him in that state. | ||
* §382 shields from liability a person who acts in state X pursuant to a legal duty or privilege and causes injuries actionable in state Y | * §382 shields from liability a person who acts in state X pursuant to a legal duty or privilege and causes injuries actionable in state Y | ||
* §380(2) provides that one who acts in state X in reliance upon a very particular standard of care will not be liable if the act causes injury in state T where the relevant standard is higher | * §380(2) provides that one who acts in state X in reliance upon a very particular standard of care will not be liable if the act causes injury in state T where the relevant standard is higher | ||
Line 46: | Line 45: | ||
# Certainty and convenience | # Certainty and convenience | ||
==PERSONAL PROPERTY | ==PERSONAL PROPERTY== | ||
(MOVABLES) = APPLY THE LAW WHERE THE PLAINTIFF IS DOMICILEDSince personal property can be moved, we determine the location by the location of the plaintiff’s domicile. For most purposes, personal property should be governed by the law of the domicile of the owner, which law would change with a change of domicile.'''BASICALLY ''''''à'''''' '''The traditional process for determining choice of law issues is that''' the law of the jurisdiction of domicile governs the disposition of personal property ('''movables'''), '''and''' the law of the situs governs the disposition of real property ('''immovables''').''''''''' | |||
{| | {| | ||
|- | |- | ||
|''In re Barrie’s Estate'', 35 N.W.2d 658 (1949) | |''In re Barrie’s Estate'', 35 N.W.2d 658 (1949) | ||
|Deceased executed a will leaving land in Iowa to a church in Illinois but will marked “void”. Improper revocation in IL but ok in Iowa. Under the intestacy laws of IL, property in the state was distributed to heirs. But under Iowa law, it goes to the church. Iowa courts can interpret a non-resident’s will who dies owning real property in Iowa. But just b/c the will was revoked in IL, doesn’t mean it was revoked in Iowa. The rule then is (BEALE) '''the law of the place the immovable is located governs the revocation of the will, and the capacity of the testator and the effect of the will'''.''' '''FF&C does not apply to real property situated in a state other than the one in which the decree was rendered. | |Deceased executed a will leaving land in Iowa to a church in Illinois but will marked “void”. Improper revocation in IL but ok in Iowa. Under the intestacy laws of IL, property in the state was distributed to heirs. But under Iowa law, it goes to the church. Iowa courts can interpret a non-resident’s will who dies owning real property in Iowa. But just b/c the will was revoked in IL, doesn’t mean it was revoked in Iowa. The rule then is (BEALE) '''the law of the place the immovable is located governs the revocation of the will, and the capacity of the testator and the effect of the will'''.''' '''FF&C does not apply to real property situated in a state other than the one in which the decree was rendered. | ||
|} | |} | ||
'''''''''Domicile '''(2<sup>nd</sup> Restatement § 11): Domicile consists of two elements that must exist concurrently: (1) physical presence in the jurisdiction, and (2) the intent to remain indefinitely.This differs from '''residence'''. Residence does not generally involve the requisite attitude of mind and requires only physical presence in a particular locality of an actual place of abode. A person can have several residences.Domicile usually gives the State personal jurisdiction over the Defendant. The law of one’s domicile will govern in certain cases. | |||
* ''Domicile by Operation of Law'' (child takes parent’s domicile) – If a natural person lacks capacity to acquire a domicile of choice, the law will assign the person a domicile. | |||
* ''Domicile of Choice'' (presence plus intent) | |||
* ''Domicile of Origin'' (''child take domicile of father then mother'')'''' | |||
{| | {| | ||
|- | |- | ||
|''White v. Tennant'', 8 S.E. 598 (1888) | |''White v. Tennant'', 8 S.E. 598 (1888) | ||
| | |Left home in WV intending to move to PA farm. Moved stuff into new house, got sick, died in WV with no will. The Court held that the deceased was domiciled in PA at death b/c he left WV with the intent and purpose of making a home in PA. The rule then is that the law of the decedent’s domicile state at the time of death controls the distribution of his estate. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 445: | Line 412: | ||
|} | |} | ||
= | =JURSIDICTION OF COURTS= | ||
What contacts or connections must a state have with a particular dispute to apply its law? | What contacts or connections must a state have with a particular dispute to apply its law? | ||
==PERSONAL JURISDICTION== | ==PERSONAL JURISDICTION== | ||
Line 487: | Line 454: | ||
'''Consent by Forum-Selection Clause:''' A forum-selection clause is a contractual provision by which the parties agree to litigate disputes arising out of the contract in a specified forum. The Supreme Court has held that agreeing to a forum-selection clause is generally a valid form of consent to personal jurisdiction.''Note'': The forum-selection clause cannot confer subject-matter jurisdiction on a court that would otherwise lack it. Parties cannot create SMJ by agreement. | '''Consent by Forum-Selection Clause:''' A forum-selection clause is a contractual provision by which the parties agree to litigate disputes arising out of the contract in a specified forum. The Supreme Court has held that agreeing to a forum-selection clause is generally a valid form of consent to personal jurisdiction.''Note'': The forum-selection clause cannot confer subject-matter jurisdiction on a court that would otherwise lack it. Parties cannot create SMJ by agreement. | ||
=RECOGNITION OF JUDGMENTS= | =RECOGNITION OF JUDGMENTS= | ||
Valid judgments in one state must be given full effect in another state. The main doctrines governing the enforcement of judgments rendered by another court in a different jurisdiction or court system are: | Valid judgments in one state must be given full effect in another state. The main doctrines governing the enforcement of judgments rendered by another court in a different jurisdiction or court system are: |