Presentation on theme: "Substance/procedure. A NY state court wants to know whether it should use PA’s statute of limitations (damages limitations, burden of proof, evidentiary."— Presentation transcript:
A NY state court wants to know whether it should use PA’s statute of limitations (damages limitations, burden of proof, evidentiary rule) with the PA cause of action How can it tell whether PA wants it to be used by sister state courts?
If PA cts use the rule for sister state causes of action do we know it is not substantive? No – it could be procedural and substantive.
If PA cts refuse use the rule for sister state causes of action do we know it is substantive? No – it could be procedural but applicable only to PA causes of action.
A PA statute creating a wrongful death action specifies the service rule for such actions. The service rule is not applied by PA cts to sister state wrongful death actions. Does that mean the service rule is substantive?
The primary reason for its existence lies in the fact that the law-making and law-enforcing agencies of the country in which land is situated have exclusive control over such land. As only the courts of that country are ultimately capable of rendering enforceable judgments affecting the land, the legislative authorities thereof have the exclusive power to promulgate the law which shall regulate its ownership and transfer.…
In re Annesley British subject in France dies what law governs her movable property English choice-of-law rule – law of domicile at death French choice-of-law rule – use law of nationality A French court had decided this issue as follows – Choose English law, but whole law which referred back to French internal law English court in In re Annesley says, French court was wrong English court would refer to whole law of France
Section 8. Rule in questions of title to land or divorce. (1) All questions of title to land are decided in accordance with the law of the state where the land is, including the Conflict of Laws rules of that State. (2) All questions concerning the validity of a decree of divorce are decided in accordance with the law of the domicile of the parties, including the Conflict of Laws rules of that State.’
2 nd Restatement Renvoi if - the objective of the particular choice of law rule is that the forum reach the same decision as that of another state (on the same facts) – Examples: validity and effect of transfer of interests in land and succession of interests in movables in a decedents estate
Massachusetts wants marriages celebrated in Mass to be valid if they are valid according to a standard upon which the parties might have reasonably relied Mass will treat a marriage entered into in Mass as valid if it is in accordance with Mass law or the law of the parties’ domicile Two Virginians who are cousins get married in Mass Marriage is illegal under Mass law but not Virginia law Marriage is being adjudicated by a Wisconsin court, which uses the place of celebration rule
- CA ct is determining validity of will concerning personalty in CA - decedent was domiciled in CA at time of execution of will and executed will in CA - but decedent was domiciled in NY at time of death - CA's choice of law rules is that the domicile of the decedent at death determines the validity of a will - NY wants to protect the expectation of the testator, so says a will is valid if it is valid under the law of either the domicile at the time of execution, or the domicile at death or the place of execution
“The courts are not free to refuse to enforce a foreign right at the pleasure of the judges, to suit the individual notion of expediency or fairness. They do not close their doors unless help would violate some fundamental principle of justice, some prevalent conception of good morals, some deep- rooted tradition of the common weal.”
“A foreign statute is not law in this state, but it gives rise to an obligation, which, if transitory, ‘follows the person and may be enforced wherever the person may be found.’ The plaintiff owns something, and we help him to get it. We do this unless some sound reason of public policy makes it unwise for us to lend our aid. ‘The law of the forum is material only as setting a limit of policy beyond which such obligations will not be enforced there‘ (Cuba R. R. Co. v. Crosby, supra, 478). Sometimes, we refuse to act where all the parties are non-residents. That restriction need not detain us: in this case all are residents. If aid is to be withheld here, it must be because the cause of action in its nature offends our sense of justice or menaces the public welfare.”
Mertz “The term ‘public policy’ is frequently used in a very vague, loose or inaccurate sense. The courts have often found it necessary to define its juridical meaning, and have held that a state can have no public policy except what is to be found in its Constitution and laws. Therefore, when we speak of the public policy of the state, we mean the law of the state, whether found in the Constitution, the statutes or judicial records.”
Mertz “The law of the forum determines the jurisdiction of the courts, the capacity of the parties to sue or be sued, the remedies which are available to suitors and the procedure of the courts. Where a party seeks in this state enforcement of a cause of action created by foreign law, he can avail himself only of the remedies provided by our law, and is subject to their limitations.”
Holzer v Deutsche Reichsbahn- Gesellschaft (NY 1938)