The ABCs of: Conflict of Laws
Here is a collection of 26 important concepts, from A to Z, you need to know about Conflict of Laws for the bar exam:
A – Analytical Approaches: Conflict of Laws relies on various analytical methods, such as the First Restatement (Vested Rights), Second Restatement (Most Significant Relationship), and Interest Analysis. Each approach determines how courts choose the applicable law in disputes involving multiple jurisdictions.
B – Borrowing Statutes: Borrowing statutes apply the statute of limitations from the jurisdiction with the most significant relationship to the dispute. Typically, the shorter limitations period governs, ensuring predictability and fairness.
C – Comity: Comity refers to the recognition of foreign laws and judgments out of mutual respect between jurisdictions. It is discretionary and typically applies in cases involving foreign country judgments.
BONUS: C – Choice of Law Clauses: Courts often enforce choice-of-law clauses in contracts if the chosen law has a substantial relationship to the transaction and is not contrary to public policy.
D – Domicile: Domicile determines a person’s legal home and is critical in applying personal jurisdiction and choice-of-law rules. Domicile can be established by choice or operation of law.
E – Erie Doctrine: In diversity cases, federal courts apply state substantive law and federal procedural law. The Erie Doctrine ensures that outcomes in federal courts mirror those in state courts under similar circumstances.
F – Full Faith and Credit: The Full Faith and Credit Clause requires state courts to recognize and enforce the judgments of sister states if jurisdiction was proper, the judgment is final, and it was decided on the merits.
BONUS: F – First Restatement: The First Restatement (Vested Rights) approach applies the law of the jurisdiction where the legal right was created or vested. This traditional approach emphasizes territoriality and predictability in resolving conflicts of law. In contract cases, the First Restatement typically applies the law of the place where the contract was made or performed. In tort cases, it applies the law of the place where the tort occurred (lex loci delicti).
G – Governmental Interest Analysis: This approach evaluates the policies and interests of the jurisdictions involved to resolve conflicts of law. If only one jurisdiction has a legitimate interest, its law applies.
H – Habitual Residence: In international cases, habitual residence is often used instead of domicile to determine jurisdiction in family law disputes, such as child custody under the Hague Convention.
I – Interest Analysis: This method focuses on identifying which jurisdiction has the greatest interest in applying its law to the dispute. It contrasts with territorial approaches, prioritizing policy goals.
J – Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to hear a case. It encompasses personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and jurisdiction to render judgments that will be recognized in other jurisdictions.
K – Klaxon Rule: Under the Klaxon Rule, federal courts exercising diversity jurisdiction apply the choice-of-law rules of the state in which they sit. This ensures consistency with state court outcomes.
L – Lex Loci: The lex loci principle applies the law of the place where a relevant event occurred, such as lex loci contractus (law of the place of contract formation) or lex loci delicti (law of the place of the tort).
M – Most Significant Relationship Test: The Second Restatement’s approach considers the connecting factors and policy principles to determine the applicable law. It aims to achieve fairness and reflect the parties’ expectations.
N – Notice: Notice requirements vary between jurisdictions. Courts evaluate whether notice was sufficient under the applicable procedural rules and whether it satisfied due process requirements.
O – Overriding Mandatory Provisions: These are laws that apply regardless of the chosen law in a conflict of laws analysis, often involving public policy or fundamental principles like consumer protection.
P – Public Policy: Courts may refuse to apply foreign law or enforce foreign judgments if they are contrary to the forum state’s fundamental public policy.
Q – Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction: Quasi in rem jurisdiction allows a court to adjudicate rights to property located within its jurisdiction, even if the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the parties.
R – Renvoi: Renvoi involves a court applying the whole law of a foreign jurisdiction, including its conflict of laws rules. This can result in remission (referring back to the forum) or transmission (referring to a third jurisdiction).
S – Second Restatement: The Second Restatement (Most Significant Relationship) approach evaluates multiple factors, including the place where the injury occurred, the residence or place of business of the parties, and the location of the conduct causing the injury. This approach balances fairness and predictability by considering the policies and interests of the jurisdictions involved. In contract cases, the Second Restatement considers factors such as the place of contracting, negotiation, performance, and the location of the subject matter. For tort cases, it evaluates the place where the injury occurred, the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred, and the domicile or residence of the parties.
T – Territoriality: Traditional conflict of laws principles often rely on territoriality, applying the law of the place where the legal issue arose or was performed.
U – Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act: This act provides a uniform standard for recognizing and enforcing foreign money judgments, ensuring consistency across states.
BONUS: U – Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act: This act allows streamlined enforcement of judgments from other states, requiring the judgment to be filed with the court clerk in the enforcing state. It promotes efficiency and ensures judgments receive full faith and credit.
BONUS: U – Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act: This act establishes consistent standards for jurisdiction in child custody disputes, prioritizing the child’s home state and preventing conflicting orders across state lines. The child’s home state is defined as the state where the child has lived with a parent or guardian for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a custody proceeding.
V – Venue: Venue pertains to the geographic location where a lawsuit may be filed. It considers factors like the residence of parties and where events occurred.
W – Workers’ Compensation: Choice-of-law issues in workers’ compensation cases often involve determining which state’s statute applies, considering factors like employment contracts and the location of the injury.
X – Exceptions to Recognition: Exceptions to full faith and credit or comity include penal judgments, tax laws, and public policy concerns that may prevent enforcement of foreign judgments.
BONUS: X – Express Choice of Law: An express choice-of-law provision in a contract allows parties to select the governing law for their agreement. Courts typically enforce these clauses if the chosen law has a substantial relationship to the transaction and is not contrary to public policy. This principle generally applies irrespective of the analytical approach the state has adopted, as long as the choice does not contravene fundamental public policy or statutory restrictions.
BONUS: X – Place of Execution: The place of execution refers to the jurisdiction where an agreement or legal instrument was signed. In conflict of laws, this factor often applies under the First Restatement (Vested Rights) approach, which prioritizes the place where the legal right was established.
Y – Yield to Public Policy: Courts may decline to apply foreign law or enforce foreign judgments if doing so would violate the forum state’s fundamental public policy. This principle ensures that local values and interests are not overridden by external legal systems.
Z – Zoning Regulations: Zoning laws may raise conflict of laws issues when property use spans multiple jurisdictions. Courts resolve disputes by balancing local land use policies with broader legal principles.
