Presentation Transcript

1. Assignment for Next Class Review Ely reading and questions Choice of Law in Federal Court Klaxon (Handout pp. 1-2) Van Dusen (Handout pp. 3-8) Congressional Legislation on Choice of Law Gottesman (Handout pp. 9-21) Questions on next slides
2. Questions on Klaxon and Van Dusen I Why is it so important for there to be uniformity of law between federal and state courts located in the same state? Why is it more important that there be uniformity between federal and state courts located in the same state than between federal courts located in different states? The Court in Van Dusen states that a Pennsylvania state court might not apply Massachusetts’s caps on wrongful death damages, even though that court would apply Massachusetts wrongful death law. Why might a Pennsylvania state court decide Massachusetts’s damage caps were inapplicable? The Court in Van Dusen states that the plaintiff has a right to choose the court. Why? Is that a right that plaintiffs should have? Is the Court’s assumption that the plaintiff has a right to choose the court consistent with the existence of 1404, which gives federal courts the power to transfer cases from one federal court to another? The Court assumes that it should respect a plaintiff’s right to select applicable law by choosing the court. Why? Is that a right that plaintiffs should have? Van Dusen involved a transfer of venue requested by the defendant. What if the plaintiff requested the transfer of venue? Should the transferee court still apply the choice of law rules of the state in which the transferor court was located?
3. Questions on Klaxon and Van Dusen II If a case is brought in state court in State A, and the state court thinks courts in State B would be much more convenient, then the court in State A can dismiss the case on forum non conveniens grounds. In that situation, the plaintiff must refile the case in state court in State B, and the court in State B will apply its own choice of law rules. What does that suggest about the law that should be applied in federal court when a case is transferred under 1404 because the court where the plaintiff filed was very inconvenient? In footnote 2, the Court states that the transferee court “may still apply its own rules governing the conduct and dispatch of cases in its own court.” How is that consistent with the holding of Van Dusen? What rules might the Court have been referring to?
4. Questions on Gottesman Do you agree with Gottesman that American choice of law is “wasteful and unfair”? Can you think of reasons other than the ones he mentions why the current system is problematic? Can you think of reasons why the situation is not as problematic as he describes? Do you agree that it would be good to have federal choice of law rules that preempted state laws? Do you agree that it there should be federal choice of law rules only in frequently litigated contexts, but that other disputes should be left to state choice of law rules? Do you agree that Congress rather than the federal courts should generate federal choice of law rules? Do you agree with Gottesman’s proposed choice of law approach? Can you think of a better one? Do you agree with Gottesman that just about any uniform, federal solution would be better than the current situation? Do you agree with Gottesman’s proposed rules for statutes of limitations? What rule would you formulate for product liability? Do you agree that choosing the law of the place of wrong (manufacture) would lead to a “race to the bottom” (p. 35)? Do you agree that McConnell’s solution (law of the place of purchase) “is worse than the evil to which it is addressed” (p. 17).