Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
conflict of laws
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| issue areas within conflict of laws | -domicile -choice of law -recognition of judgments |
| domicile | An indiv.’s dom will subject them to PJ in that state, and serve as a signif. factor when resolving a choice-of-law issue. An individ.’s dom is determined by where he physically resides w/ intent to remain; cant have more than 1 dom |
| domicile---corporations | the state where it is incorporated. |
| domicile---child | A child or person without capacity is domiciled where the custodial parents are domiciled. |
| three approaches to choice of law | -vested rights approach requires a court to apply one state’s law to all issues. -modern approach allows the court to apply a diff state’s law to 1+ issues even if the other issues are resolved under the laws of the forum state. -governmental interest |
| vested rights approach (1st restatement/traditional) | (1) Characterize the area of law as substantive or procedural (2) Apply the law of the state where the last act needed to create liability took place |
| most significant relationship approach (2nd restatement) | apply law of state w/ most signif. relationship: (1) consider connecting facts or contacts that link each state to the case; and (2) consider 7 policy principles |
| most significant relationship approach---7 policy principles | ♦ Needs of the interstate system ♦ Relevant policies of the forum ♦ Policies of interested states ♦ Party expectations ♦ Policies underlying the substantive areas of law ♦ Certainty, predictability, and uniformity ♦ Ease of future application |
| most significant relationship approach---how to | Apply the presumptive rule for the area of substantive law, and the principles to determine whether another state has a more signif. relationship |
| most significant relationship approach---presumptive rules---tort | —consider the following important contacts: ♦ Place of injury ♦ Place where conduct causing injury occurred ♦ Place of parties’ domicile or residence ♦ Place where the relationship is centered |
| most significant relationship approach---presumptive rules---contract | enforce any COL prov if the selected state has a signif. relationship; if no provision, apply the law of the place of Negotiation and Performance (if not same place), look to the contacts: 1. Place of K, N and P 2. Place where the SM is located 3. Dom |
| most significant relationship approach---presumptive rules---real property | where the property is located (the “situs”) |
| most significant relationship approach---presumptive rules---personal property | where located at the time of the transaction; for succession issues, the law of the decedent’s domicile at death (absent a choice of law provision) |
| governmental interest approach | Presumes the forum state will apply its own law unless a party can show another state’s law should be applied instead (the substantive area of law is not a factor). |
| governmental interest---whether forum state has interest | look at whether applying its law will further the law’s policy or purpose, and if it protects or burdens the forum’s citizens. |
| governmental interest---true conflict | If the forum state and another state both have an interest, the forum will re-examine the underlying policies to determine whether it has a legitimate interest in applying its own law and if so, will do so. |
| governmental interest---false conflict | If the forum state does not have an interest, but another state does, the case should be dismissed provided forum non conveniens is available; if not available, then the forum state will apply the law of the other state. |
| constitutional limitations | • Due Process—a state must have a signif contact with a dispute before it applies its own law • FFC—a state must give FFC to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of another state unless it would violate its own public policy |
| statutory limitations | a state law may dictate the choice-of-law approach, e.g., UCC, UPAA |
| limitation due to agreement | a choice-of-law provision within a valid contract, will or trust will be enforced so long as it is not contrary to public policy and the state is reasonably related to the action |
| corporations | —issues related to formation, dissolution, structure, and internal affairs are determined by the place of incorporation |
| family law---validity of a marriage | determined by the place where the marriage took place ◦ A marriage valid where entered will be given FFC unless it is against significant public policy, e.g., bigamy, incest |
| family law---premarital agreement | the UPAA uses the most significant relationship approach |
| family law---divorce | the grounds for divorce are determined by the law of the plaintiff’s domicile |
| family law---marital property | is governed by the law of the state where domiciled at the time it was acquired |
| intangible property | Vested rights—apply the law where it was created Most significant relationship—apply the seven policy principles |
| Evidence | issues relating to admissibility are procedural and controlled by the forum state; applicability of a privilege depends on the choice-of-law approach and is procedural (vested rights) or subject to the law of the state with the most signif relationship |
| UCC transactions | if the parties do not stipulate to the applicable law, the forum will apply its version of the UCC; if a particular UCC provision dictates the law, a contrary agreement is effective only to the extent allowed by law |
| UCC transactions---article 9 | generally apply the law of the state where the debtor is located; with issues regarding priority or perfection apply the law where the property (collateral) is located |
| defenses | A party might argue that application of foreign law is inappropriate because it is procedural or because it is against public policy |
| procedural laws include | venue, pleadings, joinder, burdens of proof as well as (under vested rights) the applicability and validity of an evidentiary privilege |
| substantive laws include | parol evidence, statute of frauds, and (under vested rights) damages and in some states the applicability and validity of privileges |
| statute of limitations---procedural or substantive? | generally considered proc in this context; if applying the forum state’s SOL wont bar the claim, the most signif interest approach will apply other state’s SOL if the other state has more signif R w/ the issue and it serves no subst interest of the forum |
| against public policy | a court may refuse to apply foreign law that violates a strongly held public policy of the forum state |
| state law in fed court | in a diversity case, the court must apply the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits; if the venue is transferred to a federal court in another state, the original state’s choice-of-law rules apply |
| erie doctrine | Fed question—fed court will always apply fed law Div jx—fed court must apply the subst law of the state in which it sits (i) Proc—FRCP, FRE (ii) Subst—a state law is subst if it is outcome determinative; a SOL is substantive for Erie purposes |
| FFC requirements | A judgment from another state must be given FFC in enforcing state as it would have been given in the rendering state, if three requirements are met: • Jurisdiction was proper • Judgment was final; and • Judgment was on the merits |
| conflicting judgments---FFC | the later in time judgment, if valid, is entitled to FFC |
| res judicata | a valid final judgment on the merits will have preclusive effect |
| collateral estoppel | an issue that was fully and fairly litigated will have preclusive effect |
| foreign country judgments | not entitled to FFC but can be enforced as a matter of comity; in most states, a money judgment will be enforced under the Uniform Foreign Money Judgment Recognition Act (not applicable to some judgments, e.g., taxes or child support) |
| divorce judgments---bilateral divorce decree | and the collateral issues of property rights, alimony and custody are entitled to FFC |
| divorce judgments---ex parte divorce | entitled to FFC even though only one party is domiciled and subject to personal jurisdiction of the state; there is no FFC for the collateral issues including property rights, custody and alimony, absent consent of both spouses |
| divorce judgments---child custody | UCCJEA gives 1 state (“home state”) exclusive jurisdiction to make the initial order, though it is modifiable by a diff state if home state no longer has a signifconnection to child/parent and new state can satisfy the requirements for excl. jurisdiction |
Created by:
mrynna