Conflicts Of Law Flashcards
(34 cards)
Rendering state
State handing the judgment down
Recognizing state
State called upon to recognize and enforce the judgment.
Analysis for full faith and credit
1) are the three full faith and credit requirements satisfied
2) are there any good defenses to full faith and credit
Requirements for full faith and credit
1) jurisdiction must have been proper in the rendering court
2) judgment must be on the merits
3) judgment must be final
Rule for attacking jurisdiction
Jurisdiction can only be attacked once either in the rendering court proceeding on the recognizing court proceeding.
Default judgment rule
Default judgments are on the merits
What law is used to evaluate full faith and credit requirements
Full faith and credit requirements are evaluated according to the rendering state law.
Good defenses to full faith and credit
A) the judgment is penal
B) judgment was procured by extrinsic fraud
Extrinsic fraud
If the fraud could have been dealt with during the earlier trial in the regular workings of the judicial system it’s intrinsic fraud, if not it’s extrinsic fraud.
Bad defenses to full faith and credit
A) judgment is contrary to the recognizing state’s public policy
B) mistakes of law or fact were made.
Recognizing a foreign country’s judgment
Foreign country judgments are giving comedy if our fairness standards are satisfied both in terms of whether jurisdiction was proper and whether fair procedures were given during the earlier litigation.
Requirements for domicile
A) physical presence in a place
B) intent to be domiciled in that place
Answer for a choice of law question
The court will apply the law selected by the forum court using its choice of law approach subject to constitutional and statutory limitations.
Constitutional limitations
The law applied is that of a state not having any significant contact with and/or legitimate interest in the litigation.
Statutory limitations
State or federal statutes directing the court as to what law it must or cannot apply.
Conflicts rule for federal courts sitting in diversity
Federal District Court sitting in diversity jurisdiction will apply the conflicts rules of the state in which it is located.
If the case has been transferred from another district, the court will apply the conflicts rules of the transferor state.
Vested right approach
The court will apply the law of the state mandated by the applicable vesting rule. Applicable rule is selected according to the relevant substantive area of law.
Most significant relationship approach
Court will apply the law of that state which is most significantly related to the outcome of the litigation. To determine this they will look at the connecting facts and certain policy principles.
Interest analysis approach
Court will apply its own law as long as it has a legitimate interest in the outcome of the litigation. If it has no legitimate interest this is a false conflict case and it will apply the law of another state.
Vesting rule in torts case
Place of injury
Contracts choice of law clause
If there is a valid express choice of law provision in a contract it governs and the court never gets to its choice of law approaches.
Reasons to invalidate a choice of law clause
A) law selected is that of the state having no reasonable relationship with the contract
B) no true mutual assent
Vesting rules for contracts
For formation problems it’s the place of execution.
For performance problems it’s the place of performance or the primary place of performance if in more than one state
Vesting rule for real property
The situs of the real property.