1. Thurs. Mar. 17

2. New York’s Neumeier Rules

3. Cooney v Osgood Machinery (NY 1993)

4. Under the first Neumeier rule, if parties share a common domicile, and that domicile’s law has a loss allocating rule, then that law should control….

5. The second Neumeier rule:
P’s domicile’s loss-allocating rule would allow P to win
D’s domicile’s loss-allocating rule would allow D to win
Then use place of injury

6. P (NY) guest of D (Ontario) host if accident in NY, then P wins accident in Ontario, then D wins

7. Third Neumeier rule, applicable to other split-domicile cases: usually governing law will be that of the place where the accident occurred, unless “displacing that normally applicable rule will advance the relevant substantive law purposes without impairing the smooth working of the multistate system or producing great uncertainty for litigants”

8. - unprovided for cases - including those in which accident happens in state with same law as plaintiff’s domicile - true conflicts when injury occurs in neither person home state

9. Guest (Ontario) sues Host (NY) Accident in Ontario Guest (Michigan) sues Host (NY) Accident in Ontario Guest (NY) sues Host (Michigan) Accident in Ontario

10. Edwards v. Erie Coach Lines Co. (NY 2011)

11. Dépeçage

12. Adams (NY domiciliary) is member of NY organization
Enrolls in its nature program
Truck takes him to Mass
Breaks down
Farmer with unregistered truck offers to take them the rest of way
Truck hits Adams, but not negligent
Mass law: driver unlicensed car is outlaw – liability w/o fault
NY requires negligence
Mass has charitable immunity
NY does not

13. Currie: “While Massachusetts has a policy of deterring the operation of unlicensed vehicles, it does not extend that policy to charities…. While New York has a policy of requiring compensation for its injured residents, it has no policy of imposing liability in the absence of negligence. To impose liability on this New York corporation, which has been free from fault, simply in order to carry out a nonexistent Massachusetts policy of deterrence, seems to me to be entirely unjustified….”

14. Maryland Cas v Jacek (D.N.J. 1957)
Suit by MD insurer for declaratory judgment concerning liability under auto insurance policy
Issued in NJ to NJ domiciliaries
D had driven car with wife in NY – accident there
NJ – Insurer liable for any successful suit against insured
BUT spousal immunity
NY – no spousal immunity
BUT if spouse is successfully sued, insurer not liable