F eb 11 Holzer Buchanan v Doe Va 1993 Dreher v Budget RentACar System Inc Va 2006 The statutes of New York imposing a showing of financial responsibility as a condition to the registration and operation of motor vehicles express a strong public policy that a person injured by ID: 509845
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Thurs." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Thurs.
F
eb. 11Slide2
HolzerSlide3
Buchanan v. Doe (Va. 1993)Slide4
Dreher v. Budget Rent-A-Car System, Inc. (Va. 2006)Slide5
“The statutes of New York imposing a showing of financial responsibility as a condition to the registration and operation of motor vehicles express a strong public policy that a person injured by the negligence of a driver should have recourse to a defendant able to respond in damages.” The New York legislature intended this responsibility to extend extra-territorially. The provisions of N.Y. Law § 388 have been viewed as showing a “commendable concern not only for residents of [New York], but residents of other States who may be injured as a result of the activities of New York residents.” Slide6
pleading and proving foreign lawSlide7
Fact approach to content of foreign lawSlide8
Must be pleaded
Proved
Jury
Limited appellate reviewSlide9
Conception of a cause of action as remedial rule of forum
Personal jurisdictionSlide10
Law approach to foreign lawSlide11
FRCP 44.1
A party who intends to raise an issue concerning the law of a foreign country shall give notice by pleadings or other reasonable written notice. The court, in determining foreign law, may consider any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a party or admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. The court's determination shall be treated as a ruling on a question of law.Slide12
failure to plead foreign lawSlide13
P sues D for looking at him funny – asks for $100 in mental anguish
D’s only defense is a denial that he looked at P funny
What happens to case?Slide14
Sua
sponte
?Slide15
P sues D under gambling contract
D’s only defense is that he did not breachSlide16
consent of parties
regulatory interest of stateSlide17
P sues D
(Californians) under
gambling
contract (California K) in Nevada
ct
D’s only defense is that he did not breachSlide18
…nor
shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; Slide19
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. Slide20
P sues D
(Iranians)
under gambling contract
(Iranian K
) in Nevada
ct
D’s only defense is that he did not breachSlide21
- presume complaint is sufficient
- court may introduce foreign law
sua
sponte
?
- court must introduce foreign law
sua
sponte
?Slide22
failure to offer evidence of foreign lawSlide23
P sues D
Court or D say foreign law applies
P doesn’t know about foreign lawSlide24
- Swift v. Tyson
- federal and sister state courts would come to own judgment about the general common law in a state even in the face of contrary decisionsSlide25
presumptions
- that common law applies in a common law jurisdiction (that is, has not been abrogated by statute)
- that fundamental law applies in a jurisdiction
- that law of the jurisdiction is like the forum’sSlide26
- put burden on plaintiff and dismiss
-
p
ut burden on defendant and assume states a claim
- put burden on party best able to identify law
- put burden on court
- use presumption about what law is like to allow case to proceedSlide27
- New York state courts assume that unsettled sister state law is the same as New York law
- P sues D in federal court in New York on an unsettled Pa cause of action…Slide28
- A nationwide class action is brought in NY state court concerning a provision in the UCC
- New York courts have read the provision in one way
- 6 other states have read the same provision a different way
- what about the 43 other states…?Slide29
Walton v Arabian American Oil Co (2d Cir 1956)Slide30
Louknitsky
v.
Louknitsky
- California state court determining spousal rights in marital property of couple, now domiciled in Ca., while they were in China
- presumed Chinese law was the same as California’s community property systemSlide31
Statutory solutions