Now showing items 1-10 of 87
Nebraska choice of law: An updated synthesis
In 2005, I wrote an article in this Review endeavoring to condense Nebraska choice-of-law principles into black-letter, Restatement-like rules. My purpose in doing so was to help busy judges and lawyers who generally lack ...
An essay on predictability in choice-of-law doctrine and implications for a Third Conflicts Restatement
Both Restatements of the Conflict of Laws have been controversial. The First, completed in 1934, enshrined territorial rules, such as the law of the place of the injury (lex loci delicti) governing tort cases. The First ...
One step forward and two back: Missed opportunities in refining the United States minimum contacts test and the European Union Brussels I Regulation
In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases regarding the scope of the "minimum contacts" test for permissible exercises of personal jurisdiction. In one case, relying on ill-defined notions of sovereignty, a plurality ...
American conflicts law
McIntyre Machinery, Goodyear, and the incoherence of the minimum contacts test
On June 27, 2011, when J. McIntyre Machinery Ltd. v. Nicastro and Goodyear Dunlop Tire Operations, S.A. v. Brown were handed down, it marked the first time in almost a quarter century that the United States Supreme Court ...
Emergence of quasi rules in U.S. conflicts law
Louisiana's conflicts codification: Some empirical observations regarding decisional predictability
In 1992, Louisiana became the first (and still the only) state to codify its choice-of-law doctrine. The conflicts rules that it created in statutory form are far removed from the pre-conflicts-revolution rules such as the ...
Punitive damages, forum shopping, and the conflict of laws
Few issues have as profound an impact on civil litigation as the availability and dimensions of punitive damages. States, however, vary considerably on whether punitive damages are allowed, the quantum and burden of proof ...
Real risk of forum shopping: A dissent from Shady Grove
This article is written as a hypothetical dissenting opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. In that case, the Court held that a federal court sitting ...