Top Law Schools

lol

Is this for bar review?

lol

BrokenMouse wrote:Thank you for your help in advance!

Say Plaintiff is from state A and defendant is from state B. They get into an accident in state C with over $75K damage to plaintiff. Plaintiff can sue in the state where defendant is domiciled or where substantial cause of action occurred. So Plaintiff can sue defendant in state B or C.

If P chooses to sue defendant in a federal court under diversity in state C, where cause of action occurred, does the court apply the laws of state C (including statute of limitations)?
If P chooses to sue defendant in a federal court under diversity in state B, where defendant is domiciled, does the court still apply the laws of state C (including statute of limitations)?

Well, you're skipping some steps, like personal jurisdiction. But assuming the court has jurisdiction, and assuming the issue is substantive rather than procedural, it will apply the choice-of-law law of the state in which it sits. In another words, it will look to the state's law and ask what law that state would apply. I think statutes of limitations are always (or nearly always) considered substantive.

This is a conflicts of law question more than a Civ Pro question, IMO. Is there any other context to the question? Meaning, do you know if state C has an interest in adjudicating a case from which neither party is from state C? Generally, this is known as a false conflict and the court will generally revert to the D's home state. However, if state C is more P favoring and that is why P brought the action there, and it can be shown that state C has an interest (i.e., protecting their citizens from accidents and such) then state C law would be applied.

From a purely civ pro point of view, then PJ should be valid as both parties availed themselves of State C laws by driving in that state and it is foreseeable that an accident could occur there. For diversity, the damage must meet the minimum $75,000, not sure if that is applicable if this is a simple accident COA. Venue may be argued as it may not be convenient for D to be in court in state C but that's another question.

just8250 wrote:This is a conflicts of law question more than a Civ Pro question, IMO. Is there any other context to the question? Meaning, do you know if state C has an interest in adjudicating a case from which neither party is from state C? Generally, this is known as a false conflict and the court will generally revert to the D's home state. However, if state C is more P favoring and that is why P brought the action there, and it can be shown that state C has an interest (i.e., protecting their citizens from accidents and such) then state C law would be applied.

From a purely civ pro point of view, then PJ should be valid as both parties availed themselves of State C laws by driving in that state and it is foreseeable that an accident could occur there. For diversity, the damage must meet the minimum $75,000, not sure if that is applicable if this is a simple accident COA. Venue may be argued as it may not be convenient for D to be in court in state C but that's another question.

Sounds good, but different states have different approaches to conflicts of law. The federal court can't make its own determination. It has to determine choice of law in the way that the state in which it sits would determine it.