CONFLICT OF LAWS Flashcards
Erie Doctrine
UED FCSID WAFPL BMA SSL
Rule Statement:
Under the Erie doctrine, a federal court sitting in diversity will apply its own federal procedural laws, but must apply state substantive law.
Sitting in Diversity:
A federal court hearing a case where the parties are from different states and the amount in controversy exceeds the statutory threshold.
Federal Procedural Laws:
The court will follow federal rules and procedures for handling the case.
State Substantive Law:
The court must use the relevant state laws that govern the substantive issues of the case.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Procedural vs. Substantive:
Questions might confuse procedural and substantive laws. Ensure the distinction is clear and apply accordingly.
Diversity Jurisdiction:
Fact patterns may overlook the requirement for diversity jurisdiction. Confirm the case qualifies for federal diversity jurisdiction.
Choice of Law:
Scenarios might imply the application of federal substantive law. Verify that state substantive law is used in diversity cases.
Forum State’s Choice of Law
FCSID MAFSCOLR 2DASL + MALASCW
Rule Statement:
A federal court sitting in diversity must apply the forum state’s choice of law rules to determine the applicable substantive law in the action, and must apply that law as the state court would.
Forum State’s Choice of Law Rules:
The federal court uses the legal principles of the state where it is located to decide which state’s substantive law applies.
Applicable Substantive Law:
The specific state law determined to govern the substantive issues of the case.
As the State Court Would:
The federal court must apply the substantive law in the same way the state court would interpret and enforce it.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Choice of Law Principles:
Questions might suggest federal courts use federal choice of law rules. Ensure the application of the forum state’s choice of law rules.
Consistency with State Courts:
Fact patterns may overlook the requirement to apply state law as state courts would. Confirm consistency with state court interpretation.
Diversity Jurisdiction Misinterpretation:
Scenarios might imply uniform federal rules for substantive issues. Verify the application of state substantive law through state choice of law principles.
Predicting State Law
WNCSCLIA2FC4G CMPHSHCWROI
Rule Statement:
When no controlling state case law is available to the federal court for guidance, the court must predict how the state’s highest court would rule on the issue.
Controlling State Case Law:
Existing decisions from the state’s appellate courts that provide binding legal precedents.
Highest Court:
The supreme court or equivalent highest judicial authority of the state.
Rule on the Issue:
The federal court’s determination of how the state’s highest court would decide based on state law principles and analogous cases.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Availability of Case Law:
Questions might suggest reliance on non-controlling or outdated state case law. Ensure the focus is on the absence of controlling case law.
Role of Federal Court:
Fact patterns may imply federal courts create state law. Confirm the court’s role is to predict state law application.
Guidance from Analogous Cases:
Scenarios might overlook analogous or persuasive cases from lower state courts. Verify the use of relevant state legal principles.
Federal Law Supremacy
FLWA4 MGBUSC LPBC OR VFLTPSLUSC
Rule Statement:
Federal law will apply for matters governed by the U.S. Constitution, laws passed by Congress, or valid federal law that preempts state law under the Supremacy Clause.
U.S. Constitution:
The supreme law of the land that overrides any conflicting state laws.
Laws Passed by Congress:
Federal statutes that have been enacted by the legislative branch.
Valid Federal Law that Preempts State Law:
Federal laws and regulations that take precedence over state laws in cases of conflict, as established by the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.
Supremacy Clause:
Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes that federal law takes priority over state laws.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Preemption Principle:
Questions might overlook the conditions under which federal law preempts state law. Ensure recognition of valid federal laws that conflict with state laws.
Scope of Federal Law:
Fact patterns may imply federal law applies in areas not governed by federal statutes or the Constitution. Confirm the federal law’s applicability.
Supremacy Clause Application:
Scenarios might misinterpret how the Supremacy Clause functions. Verify the correct application of federal law precedence over state law.
Full Faith and Credit: Family Law Judgments
DVGI1SIE2FF&CIAOS
IMAIE OR CC/SI
CMHPJODS4J2BE
FF&CIOS
Rule Statement:
A divorce validly granted in one state is entitled to full faith and credit in all other states.
In a matrimonial action involving economic or child custody/support issues, the court must have personal jurisdiction over the defendant-spouse for the judgment to be entitled to full faith and credit in other states.
Full Faith and Credit:
Recognition and enforcement of judicial proceedings from one state by all other states.
All Other States:
All states within the United States must honor the divorce judgment.
Personal Jurisdiction:
The court’s authority over the defendant-spouse, ensuring they have a legal obligation to follow the court’s judgment.
Defendant-Spouse:
The spouse who is required to respond to the court’s decision in matters of economic or child custody/support issues.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Jurisdiction Requirement:
Questions might overlook the necessity for personal jurisdiction. Ensure the court had authority over the defendant-spouse.
Scope of Full Faith and Credit:
Fact patterns may imply full faith and credit applies without valid jurisdiction. Confirm that proper jurisdiction is a prerequisite.
Application to Different Issues:
Scenarios might confuse the requirements for divorce versus economic or custody issues. Verify the specific requirements for each type of judgment.
Full Faith and Credit: Ceremonial and Common Law Marriage
VOMWBDBLOSTHMSR2S&M
VMFIVEU
VSPPOAS
Rule Statement:
Validity of Marriage:
The validity of a marriage will be determined by the law of the state that has the most significant relationship to the spouses and the marriage.
General Validity:
A marriage that is valid where formed is valid everywhere, unless it:
Violates the strong public policy of another state that
Has the most significant relationship to the spouses and the marriage.
Most Significant Relationship:
The state whose laws and policies are most closely connected to the couple and their marriage.
Strong Public Policy:
A fundamental policy or law of a state that opposes certain types of marriages.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Determining Significant Relationship:
Questions might misidentify the state with the most significant relationship. Ensure the correct state is identified based on connections to the spouses and marriage.
Validity Exceptions:
Fact patterns may suggest exceptions without clear public policy violations. Confirm the marriage violates a strong public policy of the state with the most significant relationship.
Scope of Full Faith and Credit:
Scenarios might overlook the application of full faith and credit to marriage validity. Verify the marriage is recognized unless it violates significant public policy.
Choice of Law Theories: Most Significant Relationship Approach
UR2OCOF LOSHMSR2T&PGA
Rule Statement:
Under the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws, the laws of the state having the most significant relationship to the transaction and the parties will govern the action.
Most Significant Relationship:
The connection and relevance of the state’s laws to the transaction and the parties involved.
Transaction and Parties:
The specific dealings and individuals or entities involved in the legal matter.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Identifying Significant Relationships:
Questions might misidentify which state has the most significant relationship. Ensure the correct state is determined based on relevant connections to the transaction and parties.
Application of Law:
Fact patterns may overlook the comprehensive nature of the relationship approach. Confirm all relevant factors are considered in determining the most significant relationship.
Conflict of Laws Principles:
Scenarios might confuse the most significant relationship approach with other choice of law theories. Verify the appropriate application of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws.
Choice of Law Theories: Interest Analysis Approach
UGIAA CWIOSI
Rule Statement:
Under the governmental interest analysis approach, the court weighs the interests of the states involved.
Weighs the Interests:
The court considers and evaluates the policies and concerns of the states that have a connection to the case.
States Involved:
The different states whose laws might be applicable based on their interests in the legal matter.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Balancing Interests:
Questions might suggest a mechanical application of laws without weighing state interests. Ensure the interests of each state are carefully considered.
Identifying Relevant States:
Fact patterns may overlook or misidentify the states with a legitimate interest. Confirm all states with a stake in the outcome are recognized.
Conflict with Other Theories:
Scenarios might confuse the interest analysis approach with other choice of law theories. Verify the use of interest analysis when weighing state interests.
Choice of Law Rules: Contracts
P2ACAF2CAPSL2BA4MOCC
Rule Statement:
Parties to a contract are free to choose a particular state’s law to be applied for matters of contract construction.
The parties may only choose which state’s law applies if:
The state has some connection with the contract;
The contract has not been entered into under fraud, duress, or mistake; and
The choice of law isn’t contrary to a substantial policy interest of another state that has more of a significant interest in the matter.
1. Connection with the Contract:
The chosen state must have some relevant link to the contract or the parties involved.
2. Absence of Fraud, Duress, or Mistake:
The contract must be validly entered into without any of these vitiating factors.
3. Not Contrary to Substantial Policy Interest:
The selected law must not oppose a fundamental policy of a state with a stronger connection to the issue.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
State Connection:
Questions might imply a random choice of state law is permissible. Ensure the chosen state has a legitimate connection to the contract.
Validity of Contract:
Fact patterns may overlook issues like fraud or duress. Confirm the contract was not affected by these factors.
Policy Interests of Other States:
Scenarios might ignore substantial policy interests of other states. Verify the choice of law does not conflict with a state having a more significant interest.
Choice of Law Theories: Traditional Vested Rights Approach
UTVRA LOSIWT OR EO IA
Rule Statement:
Under the traditional vested rights approach, the law of the state in which the transaction or event occurred is applied.
Transaction or Event:
The specific act or occurrence that gives rise to the legal issue.
Occurred:
The location where the transaction or event took place.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Identifying the Correct State:
Questions might misidentify where the transaction or event occurred. Ensure the correct state is determined based on the actual occurrence.
Application of Law:
Fact patterns may overlook the strict application of the law of the state where the event or transaction occurred. Confirm the traditional approach’s requirements.
Comparison with Modern Approaches:
Scenarios might confuse the traditional vested rights approach with more modern, flexible approaches. Verify the use of the traditional approach based on the facts provided.
Choice of Law Rules: Contractual Forum-Selection Clause
G CWECFSC 2TVUSFAP
Rule Statement:
Generally, a court will enforce a contractual forum-selection clause to transfer venue unless special factors are present.
The Supreme Court has held that a forum-selection clause is an important factor favoring a change of venue, even if the forum-selection clause is unenforceable under the applicable state law.
Contractual Forum-Selection Clause:
A provision in a contract where the parties agree that any disputes will be resolved in a specified forum.
Transfer Venue:
Moving the location of a trial to the forum agreed upon in the contract.
Special Factors:
Circumstances that might lead a court to disregard the forum-selection clause, such as fraud, undue influence, or extreme inconvenience.
Supreme Court’s Stance:
The highest court’s ruling that forum-selection clauses should generally be given significant weight in deciding venue issues.
Unenforceable Under State Law:
Even if the clause would not be upheld according to the state law, it is still considered by federal courts as a significant factor.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Enforceability:
Questions might suggest forum-selection clauses are always enforceable. Ensure understanding of exceptions due to special factors.
Supreme Court Guidance:
Fact patterns may overlook the Supreme Court’s emphasis on these clauses. Confirm their importance in venue decisions.
State vs. Federal Law:
Scenarios might confuse the enforceability under state law with the federal perspective. Verify the federal approach to forum-selection clauses.
Conflict of Laws: Real and Personal Property
UR2COL LOSWRPILGIDUIOULW&T
Rule Statement:
Under the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws, the law of the state where the real property is located governs its disposition under intestacy or under a last will and testament.
In a will, a decedent may designate a particular state’s law to be applied for matters of construction, but the validity and effect of a will is always determined by the law of the situs state.
The law of the decedent’s domicile state at the time of death governs the disposition of a decedent’s personal property.
Real Property:
The laws of the state where the real property is situated control its inheritance and distribution.
Intestacy or Last Will and Testament:
The legal guidelines for property distribution without a will or as specified in a will.
Validity and Effect of a Will:
The legal standing and implications of the will are governed by the situs state (state where the property is located).
Decedent’s Domicile State:
The state where the deceased person had their permanent home at the time of their death.
Time of Death:
The specific moment when the decedent passed away, determining which state’s laws apply to personal property distribution.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Real vs. Personal Property:
Questions might confuse the laws governing real property and personal property. Ensure distinction between the situs state and domicile state.
Choice of Law in Wills:
Fact patterns may overlook that validity and effect are governed by the situs state, regardless of the decedent’s designation for construction matters.
Domicile State’s Role:
Scenarios might ignore the importance of the decedent’s domicile state for personal property. Confirm the correct state’s law at the time of death.
What are the three main principles of Conflict of Laws on the UBE?
Jurisdiction: Authority of the court to decide the dispute.
Choice of Law: Determining which law applies (federal or state, and if state, which state).
Recognition: When and how courts recognize judgments from outside the forum.
What are the typical default rules for choice of law issues?
What are the typical default rules for choice of law issues?
Back:
Lex Fori: “The law of the forum in which the action is brought.” Courts use the procedural laws of their forum and often the substantive laws of their forum too.
What is depecage in conflict of laws?
What is depecage in conflict of laws?
Back:
Depecage: Issue-by-issue analysis leading courts to apply the laws of multiple jurisdictions to one case.
