Conflict of Laws Flashcards
Key principle #1:
Conflict of Laws issues are embedded in other MEE subject areas. Conflict of Laws will not be a stand-alone question. Conflict of Laws is commonly tested with Family Law, Civil Procedure, or Decedents’ Estates.
Key principle #2:
When Conflict of Laws is combined with Family Law, these are the issues generally tested:
Full faith and credit:
A state must recognize final judgments of other states so long as the judgment is on the merits and the other state had jurisdiction. (F2017, F2007, J2004, F2000)
Recognition of marriage:
A marriage which is valid under the law of the state where it was contracted will be valid elsewhere unless it violates a strong public policy of the state that has the most significant relationship to the spouses and the marriage. Some examples of what may violate public policy include incest or polygamy. Examples of what do not violate public policy include blood test requirements, marriage license requirements, and recognition of common law marriage. Common law marriage is virtually always tested when this principle is tested. So, know that if the marriage is recognized by the state where the couple entered into the marriage, it will be recognized by all other states. (F2017, J2011, J2006, J1995)
Jurisdiction over divorce vs. jurisdiction over spousal support and property division:
Personal jurisdiction over both spouses is not necessary to render a divorce decree. The state rendering the decree only needs jurisdiction over the plaintiff spouse. However, personal jurisdiction over both spouses is necessary to issue a binding property division order or support order. (This embodies the concept of a “divisible” divorce decree.) (F2007, F2003, F2000, F1996)
Recognition of divorce:
A divorce decree must be granted full faith and credit by other states if the court rendering the divorce decree had jurisdiction to enter it. (F2007, F2003, J2000, F2000)
Which state’s law governs premarital agreements?
Some states will apply the law of the state where the contract was executed. Other states (probably more numerous) apply the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the parties and transaction. (J2008)
Key principle #3:
when Conflict of Laws is combined with Federal Civil Procedure, generally the Klaxon doctrine is tested (i.e., you should know that a federal district court in a diversity case must apply the choice of law approach of the state in which it sits) or change of venue rules are tested (specifically, you should know that if a case is transferred to a more appropriate forum, the law of the transferor court will apply).
Klaxon doctrine:
A federal district court sitting in diversity must apply the choice of law approach prevailing in the state in which it sits. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co. (J2017, F2012, F2009, J1995)
Example of Klaxon doctine:
If a state claim in Michigan is brought by a Michigan plaintiff against an Illinois defendant in a federal district court in Michigan on a diversity basis, the federal district court must apply Michigan choice of law rules when determining which state’s law to apply. This makes sense because it provides no incentive for the parties to forum shop.
Change of venue:
A court may transfer a case to any district court in which it could have been brought if convenience and the “interest of justice” favor a transfer. When a case is transferred to a more appropriate forum under this rule, then the new (transferee) court must apply the laws that the original transferor court would have applied (including their state choice of law rules). Note that the result is different if the case was initially filed in an improper forum and was transferred to a proper forum: in that case, the transferee court would apply its own law, rather than the law of the transferor court, since the transferor court would not have the power to hear the case in the first place. (F2012, J1995)
Statute of limitations:
Generally, a court will apply its own procedural laws even if the substantive laws of another state are applied to the case. A statute of limitations is generally considered procedural. Generally, a court applies its own statute of limitations unless the claim would be barred by the law of the state with a more significant relationship to the parties. (F1999, F1997)
Exception—borrowing statute:
Some states have borrowing statutes which indicate that the other state’s statute should be used in certain cases.
Exception—characterization:
When a statute of limitations is specific to a particular kind of claim and was created by the law that created the cause of action to which it applies, courts will often characterize the statute of limitations as substantive. (Traditionally, this was applied only when the foreign statute barred an otherwise timely action, not when it extended the time for bringing the action.)
Exception—interest analysis:
Some states will simply use an interest analysis to resolve choice of law issues, including statute of limitations issues.