Law Outlines Conflict of Laws Outline - Kay, Kramer & Roosevelt Outlines
Extremely detailed outlined made for Conflict of Laws. Based off the book by Kay, Kramer & Roosevelt, but covers all of the topics covered in any Conflict of Laws or Choice of Law class. Specifically targets the forks in the issues, and provides ways to argue both sides of a particular issue. Maximize your exam points!...
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Conflict of Laws Outline - Kay, Kramer & Roosevelt Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Conflicts Outline
Spring 2015, Collins
Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments (Full Faith and Credit) 3
Constitutional Obligation of Sister States to Enforce Judgments 3
Exceptions to Full Faith and Credit 4
Judicial Choice of Law Methods 6
Traditional Choice of Law Methodology (First Restatement) 6
Choice of Law and Marriage (DOMA) 7
Wrinkles Within Traditional Theory (Escape Devices) 7
Applying the Procedural Rules of the Forum State 8
Governmental Interest Analysis 11
Second Restatement Analysis Example [Tooker v. Lopez] 20
Bad Applications of the Second Restatement 21
Possible Statutory Solutions to Choice of Law Questions 22
Second Restatement: Choice of Law Clauses in Contracts 24
Applying the Second Restatement to Choice of Law Clauses in Contracts 25
State and Federal Court Coordination 26
Substantive/Procedural Distinctions in Federal Courts for Erie (Klaxon Rule) 26
Mass Tort Multi District Litigation 28
Constitutional Limits on Choice of Law 29
Historical Due Process Limitation 29
Early Full Faith and Credit 30
Modern Convergence of a Single DP/FFC Standard 31
(Constitutional?) Limitations on Door Closing Rules and Forum Exclusivity 33
Article 4’s Privileges and Immunities Clause 35
The Special Problem of Divorce 36
If federal law applies in some fashion, that law is going to apply (as a matter of the Supremacy Clause), there is no choice of law to consider.
So, this class surrounds instances in which federal law has not stepped into the picture to preempt state law
Also, sometimes there is a federal law which says which state’s law applies to a particular transaction, which would also make our life easy
However, most choice of law rules are STATE choice of law rules (CL rules usually that say which state law applies when brought before a court in this state
Four Components of Conflict of Laws:
(1) Personal Jurisdiction (not doing this)
(2) Choice of Law
(3) Constitutional Limitations on Choice of Law
(4) Constitutional obligation of sister states to enforce judgments [this is our starting point]
|
|
A PP objection CAN be raised, however, to foreign COUNTRY judgments sought to be enforced in a US court
If you are in a Missouri court and you think they misapplied Mississippi law (like in Fanutleroy), you can apply up the ladder through the Missouri courts and argue that the lower court misapplied Mississippi law.
If you apply up through the Missouri courts and still no avail , very little opportunity to get SCOTUS jurisdiction – available only if “the misconstruction contradicted the law of the other state that is CLEARLY ESTABLISHED” [Wester Life v. Rupp] (but a state court decision has NEVER been overturned on this ground]
This does mean that there may be limited opportunity for SCOTUS to police for egregious error in a state court w/r/t to state law, but there is still NO POSSIBILITY for an enforcing court to raise an “egregious error of law” defense
Note that this only applies to cases in which a judgment has already been entered. A state CAN CLOSE ITS DOORS by virtue of a public policy objection “in the first instance” and just refuse to hear the case.
Process to get your judgment recognized by a sister-state court:
(1) File a suit to have the judgment recognized
(2) Ask the court to enforce the judgment
**some states have Revised Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgment Act – essentially short-circuits the above process and allows a litigant with a judgment to skip step (1) and go straight to enforcement in the sister state.
1.) Jurisdictionally Defective Judgments |
Forum state is allowed to determine if SMJ or PJ was valid in judgment-rendering state whose judgment is sought to be enforced if the issue was NOT LITIGATED in the judgment-rendering state [Adam v Saenger]
If SMJ or PJ jurisdiction is actually litigated in F1, even if the ultimate jurisdictional decision was wrong, that will ordinarily be preclusive to the question in F2 [Durfee v. Duke]
***UNLESS F1 law says such is NOT preclusive, b/c F2 is only required to give F1 the same credit F1 would give it, and if it would not give it any credit, then F2 does not have to
IF PJ was NOT litigated, but the MERITS were, most states would consider that to be a waiver of the PJ defense and thus perclusive
IF SMJ was NOT litigated, but the MERITS were, you have different views FORK:
(1) Going to be tough to collaterally attack a federal court that heard the merits but did not litigate SMJ
(2) But w/r/t states, if SMJ not litigated in round one, some states allow relitigation even if merits were heard, others do not
If the jurisdictional question is litigated in F1, but F2 says screw it and re-litigates the jurisdictional...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Conflict of Laws Outline - Kay, Kramer & Roosevelt Outlines.
Extremely detailed outlined made for Conflict of Laws. Based off the book by Kay, Kramer & Roosevelt, but covers all of the topics covered in any Conflict of Laws or Choice of Law class. Specifically targets the forks in the issues, and provides ways to argue both sides of a particular issue. Maximize your exam points!...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started