Conflicts

Front 1

Conflicts Outline

Back 1

1) Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

2) Domicile

3) Choice of Law ***

Front 2

Recognition and enforcement of Judgments

Back 2

Situation: facts show a judgment rendered in another state or country, OUTSIDE OF NY

SHould that judgment be enforced by NY courts?

Rendering state - state that handed down the judgment

Recognizing state - state called on to recognize and enforce the judgment

Two situations:
1) Was the judgment rendered by a sister state court?
2) Was the judgment rendered by a foreign country court?

Front 3

Sister State Judgments (much more likely than foreign)

Back 3

To see if judgment is entitled to full faith and credit, ask:

1) does the judgment meet the full faith and credit requirements, and
2) No valid defenses apply that would bar giving full faith and credit

Front 4

Full Faith and Credit Requirements

1) Valid Jurisdiction of the rendering court

Back 4

1) Valid J in the rendering court over both the parties and the subject matter of the litigation

Front 5

Full faith and credit requirements:

2) Final Judgment

Back 5

2) The judgment was a final judgment

(if a judgment was modifiable it is not a final judgment and gets NO full faith and credit, BUT it will usually still be enforced under principals of COMITY - the two modifiable judgments to remember: 1) future alimony, 2) future child support) (judgments for amounts already accrued in arrears are considered final judgments)

Front 6

Full Faith and Credit Requirements

3) Judgment Must have been on the MERITS

Back 6

i.e. can't be a procedural dismissal

Two situations that are considered on the merits for ful faith and credit purposes:

1) default judgments
2) consent judgments

The parties in these 2 had the opp to to go a judgment on the merits, so they are considered that way

Front 7

Defenses that could apply that would bar giving full faith and credit

Back 7

Most attempted defenses don't work, but you need to talk about the "non-defenses" if they're in the facts.

Only two defenses are good today:

1) The judgment is PENAL - courts won't enforce penal judgments
"Penal" - judgment renderd for offense against the public
Punitive isn't penal (must be crim sanction, civil fine - winner must be govt, not private person)

2) Extrinsic fraud (not instrinsic)

Intrinsic fraud - could have been dealt w/ during the litigation - NOT a good defense to FF&C

Extrinsic fraud - could not have been coped w/ in the earlier trial - only example to worry about: bribing a judge

Non-defenses (used to be defenses:
1) Judgment is a tax judgment

2) Judgment is based on a COA that violate's recognizing state's public policy (doesn't matter

3) Mistakes by the judge in the ealrier trial (remedy is to appeal)

4) Inconsistent judgments (later judgment can be enforced even if it's inconsistent w/ earlier one - generally, enforce last judgment in time

Front 8

Foreign Judgments

Back 8

Can be recognized and enforced if two part comity test is satisfied:

1) J must have been proper, and

2) fair procedures must have been used in the foreign country - general fairness recognized by NY law

Front 9

Special Situation: FAMILY LAW JUDGMENTS

Back 9

Recognition and enforcement of family law judgments involves consideration of J, both SMJ and PJ

Three types of judgments, each w/ its own jurisdictional requirements:

1) divorce - termination of marital status

2) property awards - i.e. child support/alimony

3) child custody awards

J is key in all 3

Judgments may be of all 3 types (i.e. divorce w/alimony, child support, and child custody), so you may have to consider J for each

Front 10

The Divorce

Back 10

A valid divorce requires proper SMJ and this requires that ONE of the 2 spouses be domiciled in the state rendering the divorce

Front 11

3 types of divorce:

1) Ex parte Divorce

Back 11

1) only one of the spouses is validly domiciled where the divorce is granted

i.e. Liz/John married and live in NY. Liz moves to Vegas, obtains valid domicile, gets divorce. John not domiciled there, nor subject to PJ there.

This is an ex parte divorce, it is still valid

Front 12

2) Bilateral Divorce

Back 12

One of the spouses is validlly domiciled where the divorce is granted, and BOTH ARE SUBJECT TO PJ THERE

i.e. Liz/John are married and live in NY. Liz goes to Vegas, gets valid domicile. To convince her to come back, John goes to Vegas. At the airport in Vegas she serves him w/ divorce papers.

Valid, bilateral divorce

Front 13

3) Consent Divorce

Back 13

Both want out, go together somewhere to get it (quickie divorce)

Both fly to Mexico, get their divorce there, fly back.

Not valid - netiehr had valid domicile

SO FOR ANY KIND OF DIVORCE TO BE VALID THERE MUST BE VALID DOMICILE OF AT LEAST ONE OF THE PARTIES TO GIVE THE NECESSARY SMJ

Front 14

Procedural Matters on Divorces

1) Burden of Proof

Back 14

The attacker bears the burden of proof and can introduce whatever relevant evidence, even if the evidence came into existence AFTER the divorce was granted (i.e. Liz later admits to friend she wasn't really domiciled in NV)

Front 15

2) Any interested person can attack divorce for lack of SMJ

Back 15

2) Any interested person who is not estopped can attack a divorce decree for lack of SMJ

Strangers to marriage can't attack it

4 basic situations on estoppel - P is estopped in each one

1) attacker was subject to PJ in the earlier proceeding - the spouse in a bilateral divorce cannot later attack that divorce

2) Attacker may not have been subject to PJ in the earlier proceeding, but the attacker play a meaningful role in granting the divorce - i.e. John let her go, bought her ticket, drove her to airport - he can't now attack that ex parte divorce (estopped

3) persons who are in privity w/ a party to the divorce (includes children

4) spouse who has remarried in reliance on the earlier divorce (i.e. John remarries after Liz's ex parte divorce - can't get out of marriage 2 by claiming lack of PJ for divorce - estopped

Front 16

Property Awards

Back 16

Court granting alimony or child support must have PJ over the spouse whose property rights are in issue

i.e. Liz goes to Vegas, gets ex parte divorce. Court also gives $5k a month alimony and $500 a month in child support

Divorce is valid

Alimony is not valid - no PJ over John

Child support not valid - no PJ over John

Front 17

Child Custody Degree - J

Back 17

ONLY THE CHILD'S HOME STATE has valid J for determining child custody

Front 18

Family Law J in a Nutshell

Back 18

For divorce: SMJ - valid domicile of at least one party

For Property awards (alimony, child support): PJ over the spouse whose rights are being determined

For child custody: PJ over the child (that is, child's home state)

Front 19

Divisible Divorce Doctrine (common on exam)

Back 19

If a decree has some parts that are good and some that are bad, you keep the good and ignore the rest - divisible divorce doctrine

i.e. husband, wife, kid live in CT. wife goes to Vegas, declares domicile there, obtains ex parte divorce - court awards alimony and child support and sole custody of kid.

Divorce- valid
Alimony - not valid (no PJ over husband)
Child support - not valid (no PJ over husband)
Child custody - not valid - not kid's home state

Front 20

Domicile: 4 ways it could appear on the exam:

Back 20

1) domicile of decedent used to choose the law to be applied to determine intestate succession of personal property (use decedent's domicile, even for his property in other states

2) domicile at death determines which state gets estate taxes

3) domicile of an individual gives SMJ for a divorce (i.e. wife flies to Vegas to get divorce, gets domiciled there, granted divorce, husband has never been to Vegas --> valid divorce, b/c she was validly domiciled there)

4) Domicile is very important when applying NY choice of law rules

Front 21

Domicile of Choice

Back 21

Legal capacity is needed to make a domicile of choice (standard: ability to fend for yourself)

Two part test to establish a domicile of choice:
1) physical presence in that state
2) the intent to remain for the foreseeable future - i.e. indefinitely

These are factual issues. Phys presence can be short and still satisfy this

i.e. you move to NJ, and after you move your stuff you decide to stay in your NY apt one last night. Fire kills you - you died domiciled in NJ (doesn't need to be long)

If there's a conflict b/w acts and words on intent: actions speak louder than words - what you do counts for more than what you say in terms of intent.

You can only have ONE domicile

Once obtained, a domicile is kept until another one is acquired (i.e. you leave NY, say you're never coming back, get killed in car crash in VA on the way to your new house in FL - still domiciled in NY

Motive for going to another state to acquire domicile is irrelevant (i.e. even if you did it to avoid creditors, your new state is your

Front 22

Domicle by Operation of Law

Back 22

If a person has no legal capacity to acquire a domicile of choice, that person will be assigned one by operation of law.

Two situations for the exam:

1) Domicile of child - if child doesn't have legal capacity to get a domicile of choice, the child will ahve the domicile of the child's parents (if parents are divorced - domicile of parent w/ custody)

2) domicile of married woman living apart from her husband in a different state: today married woman can obtain domcile of choice, just like anyone else (tell examiner that old rule was married woman had domicile of her husband)

Front 23

Choice of Law: Constitutional Limitations

Back 23

Two const provisions:

1) Due Process
2) Full Faith and Credit Clause

One test to see if each is satisfied:

The sate chosen must have significant contact/contacts w/ the parties or the subject matter of the litigation which give it a legit interest in seeing its law applied. Short version: significant contact giving legitimate interest (easy test to satisfy, on the exam just give the test and say it meets it

i.e. P lives in state X, but accident happened in state Y and D lives in state Y. P sues in State X - test is met - P is a resident of X, so state X has significant contact givign a legitimate interest.

No weighing of the interests of the state is needed - once there's a state interest (i.e. welfare of its citizen), you can apply that state's law

Two situations that don't meet the test:
1) If, after the event in question, someone moves to a new state, and that move creates the only contact w/ that state, then it would be unconst to apply that state's law

2) if the only contact w/ the parties or th

Front 24

Vested Rights Approach to Choice of Law (traditional system)

Back 24

This was the only system til 1960s - called the territorial approach:

Under the vested rights approach, the law to be applied is the law where the RIGHTS OF THE PLAINTIFF VESTED

Rule for each area of the law (examples):

1) torts - instant a COA arises P's rights become vested - so vested rights rule would say apply the law of the place where the injury occurred/place of the wrong (not the place of the negligence, but the place of the injury)

2) Ks - rights under a K vest the moment a K is made - so vested rights rule would say apply law of the place K was made

Two things to note about vested rights approach:
1) it had a rule for every area of law
2) the rules were all territorial rules, pointing to a single place

Front 25

Problem w/ vested rights approach:

Back 25

Problem was, sometimes vested rights approach would end up pointing to a state that had absolutely no policy interest in the outcome of the litigation

i.e. Two NY residents drive to Ontario for day trip. Car accident while there. Passenger sues driver in NY court - NY doesn't have guest statute that would prohibit suit by passenger against host driver - Ontario does have such a statute. Ontario has no policy interest here

Front 26

Interest Analysis Approach to Law

5 step Babcock approach to interest analysis

Back 26

1) List the factual contacts w/ each state

2) note the different state laws in issue

3) find out the policies underlying each state's law by consulting leg history and court decisions (on exam, find out which state law would favor P and which would favor D)

4) take the facts and relate them to the policies to see if the state has an interest in seeing its law paplied (does the party being favored by a state's law reside in that state? If so, that state has an interest)

5) Apply the law of the state w/ the greatest govtal interest in the outcome

Front 27

Step 5 of Babcock

5) Apply the law of the state w/ the greatest govtal interest in the outcome

Must see which one of four categories the conflict fits in:

Back 27

1) Is it a false conflict - that is, where only one state has an interest in having its law applied (if so, apply law of the only J w/ an interest in the outocme of the litigation0

2) is it a true conflict: that is, where two or more of the states involved have an interest in the lit, and one is the forum state (i.e. NJ sues NY for breach of K in NY court. Under NY law, P would prevail. Under NJ law, D would prevail. What state - NY!! Both states have an interest, it's a true conflict - apply the law of the forum state, unless the interest of the other state is much greater

3) Is it a disinterested forum case - where 2 or more states have an interest in having their law applied and the forum is not one of them. (i.e. TX P sues CT D in NY court - TX law favors P, CT law favors D, NY has no interest.

In a disinterested forum case, a NY court can do one of 2 things:
1) Apply the law CLOSEST TO NY LAW
2) Apply the BETTER LAW

4) Is it an unprovided for case - where no state has an interest in applying its own

Front 28

Specific Areas

Torts

Back 28

If it's a torts question, use the 5 step Babcok test Plus the additional three rules of Neumeier (often on exam, if conflicts is on exam)

Neumeier rule 1: D and P are domiciled in the same state, that stae's law will be applied - domicile rule

Neumeier Rule 2 - P and D are domiciled in difft states, then if the law of the place where the accident occurred helps its citizen, that state's law will be applied

Neumeier Rule 3 - P and D are domiciled in difft Js and the law of the place where the accident occurred does not help its citizen, you still apply the law of the place of the injury unless the other J has a greater interest in the outcome

Neumeier rule in a nutshell: Apply the law of the place of the injury UNLESS BOTH PARTIES LIVE SOMEPLACE ELSE

Front 29

Torts

Loss distribution Rules

Back 29

Most torts rules are loss distribution rules - htose that determine which party will bear the loss.

APply the Babcock/Neumeier analysis to all loss distribution rules

Front 30

Torts

Rules regulating conduct

Back 30

For all rules regulating conduct, apply the law of the place of the injury (i.e. speed limit - place of injury)

Rules regulating conduct sometimes called rules of the road

Front 31

Step by step method for torts case on exam

Back 31

10 is the law a rule regulating conduct or a rule on loss distribution?

2) if a rule regulating conduct, apply the law of the place of injury

3) if a rule on laoss distribution, discuss the Babcock 5 step method and the 3 Neumeier rules and apply the law of the state indciated

Front 32

Contracts

Back 32

1) K language controls - parties can always choose the law in the K for matters of K construction (can use ANY law)

2) Parites can also choose the law to govern matters of K validity provided three things exist:
1. choice can't be contrary to fundamental policy of a state w/ greater interest than chosen state
2. There must be a substantial relationship to the parties or transaction
3. The choice must be free of duress; that is, not a K of adhesion

NY Special Statute on Large Ks: If K is for more than 250k, parties can choose NY law even ifK has no connection w/ NY at all

If K is for more than $1 million, and parties choose NY law in the K, the parites may also put in a clause specifiying NY may be the forum, and courts are prohibited from dismissing under forum nonconveniens

For Ks, NY applies 5 step Babcock - call the state chosen the state w/ the most significant relations to the K

Special rule for insurance Ks - rights/duties are based on state where policy is written

Front 33

REal Property

Back 33

Just one rule: the law of the situs of the property governs - the law of the place where the property is located

Front 34

Personal Property

Back 34

For every situation but one, use the same situs rule as for real prop

BUT if the issue is the passing of personal property by intestate succession, the state chosen is the state of the deceased's domicile at death

Front 35

Inheritance

Back 35

Non-NY domiciliary can choose NY in a will to apply to the disposition of NY assets

This applies in all situations even when it would outst a spouse from an elective share

Front 36

Family Law

Back 36

Gen rule: if marriage is valid where performed, valid everywhere

Exception - if marriage would violate strong pub policy of state then it may not be recognized even if valid where perfromed (same sex will be valid)

Marriages void where performed void everywhere - but if void b/c it failed to comply w/ some technical requirement, can still be recognized in NY if it would have been recognized w/ NY rule

Divorces are governed by the law of the P's domicle

Front 37

Defenses to Choice of law

3 defenses:

Back 37

1) The law chosen is procedural, not substantive.

Procedural: 1) burden of proof, 2) SoL (Exception - borrowing statute, which will borrow and apply the shorter statute of the state where a COA arose. BUT NY will not apply borrowing statute if P is from NY
3) ability to bring counterclaims

Subsantive - 1) contrib or compar neg, 2) SoF, 3) PER, 4) contribution among tortfeasors, 5) direct action statutes


2) that the law is against pub policy of the forum state - must be really offensive for this to apply

3) that the law is a penal law - applies only to offenses against the public - crim judgment or civil fine

Front 38

Use of State Law in FED Courts

Back 38

Fed ct sitting in diversity case must use the choice of law rules of the state in which it sits

Front 39

Notice And Proof of Foreign Law

Back 39

Courts will take judicial notice of sister-state and federal law - but the law of a foreign coutnry is a fact - which must be pleaded and proved

If the foreign law cannot be determined then a NY court will apply NY law, so long as there's no injustice