THE THEORIES:

State of the Most

Significant
Relationship
The Interest-
Analysis
Approach
Qavers Principle
of Preference
The Kilberg
Doctrine






State of the Most Significant Relationship
the rights and obligations
of the parties in case of tort
is determined by the local
law of the state which, with
respect to the particular
issue, has the most
significant relationship to
the occurrence and the
parties.
STATE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
RELATIONSHIP
HOW
DETERMINED?
State
1
State
2
QUALITATIVE VS. QUANTITATIVE


FACTORS
the place where
the injury occurred;
the place where
the conduct
causing the
injury occurred;
the domicile, residence,
nationality, place of
incorporation and place
of business of the parties
the place where the
relationship, if any,
between the parties
is centered
STATE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
RELATIONSHIP: THE CASES
Interest-Analysis Approach
once a genuine
conflict is
discovered, the
law of the forum
is immediately
applied
builds upon the
policy analysis of
the "significant
interest" test
Professor
Brainerd Currie
THE INTEREST-ANALYSIS APPROACH: WHEN
APPLICABLE?
False Conflict?
If the laws of both
states relevant to the
set of facts are the
same, or would
produce the same
decision in the
lawsuit, there is no
real conflict between
them
According to Conflicts
of Laws principles,
where the laws of the
two jurisdictions
would produce the
same result on the
particular issue
presented, there is a
false conflict,
THE INTEREST-ANALYSIS APPROACH: WHEN
APPLICABLE?
3 STEPS to
INTEREST-
ANALYSIS
APPROACH
the court examines the
substantive law of each
jurisdiction to determine
whether the laws differ as
applied to the relevant
transaction
if the laws do differ, the
court determines whether
a true conflict exists in that
each of the relevant
jurisdictions has an
interest in having its law
applied
comparative impairment of
the interested jurisdictions
INTEREST ANALYSIS APPROACH: THE CASES
Principle of Preference
a higher standard of conduct
and financial protection given to
the injured party by one state is
applied by the State where the
injury was sustained, if the
latter State adopts a lower
standard of conduct and
financial protection to the
injured
Qavers
Principle of
Preference
PRINCIPLE OF PREFERENCE: THE CASES
KILBERG DOCTRINE
STATE 1 STATE 2
KILBERG DOCTRINE
Applied in suits involving
conflicts of law that
provides that the forum is
not bound by the law of
the place of injury or death
as to the limitation on
damages for wrongful
death action
RATIONALE: laws that set
limitations on damages are
procedural. Hence the law
of the forum should govern
the issue
RULING
the cause of action alleges a breach of duty through
negligence
the laws of Massachusetts, where the injuries were inflicted,
govern the extent of the damages which may be recovered
ISSUE
The State where the decedents heirs may recover damages
FACTS
a passenger for hire, traveling in the defendant's plane from
New York to Nantucket, Massachusetts, was killed when the
plane crashed on Nantucket Island
seeks to recover for loss of accumulation on behalf of the
estate, pursuant to the New York Decedent Estate Law