TortsProf Blog

Editor: Christopher J. Robinette
Widener Commonwealth Law School

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Symeonides' 26th Annual Choice of Law Survey

Symeon Symeonides has published his annual chocie of law survey.  The abstract provides:


This is the Twenty-Sixth Annual Survey of American Choice-of-Law Cases. It is intended as a
service to fellow teachers and students of conflicts law, in the United States
and abroad.

            Of the 4,300 cases decided in 2012 by
state and federal courts, this Survey reviews 1,225 appellate cases, focusing
on those cases that may contribute something new to the development or
understanding of conflicts law, particularly choice of law. Highlights include:

▸          Numerous exemplifying the valiant efforts of state courts, and
some lower federal courts, to protect consumers, employees, and other
presumptively weak parties from the Supreme Court’s ever-expanding
interpretation of the Federal Arbitration Act;

▸          A few cases enforcing choice-of-law clauses unfavorable to
their drafters, and many more cases involving deadly combinations of
choice-of-law and choice-of-forum clauses;

▸          Several interesting products liability cases, and other tort
conflicts, including maritime torts and workers’ compensation claims by
professional football players;

▸          The first appellate case interpreting the recent amendments
of the anti-terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA);

▸          The first cases holding unconstitutional the Defense of
Marriage Act (DOMA);

▸          A Massachusetts case holding that an undissolved Vermont
same-sex union was an impediment to a subsequent same-sex marriage in

▸          An Arizona case holding that a Canadian same-sex marriage
was against Arizona’s public policy, but—unlike other cases—also holding that
the trial court had jurisdiction to annul the marriage and divide the parties’

▸          The first case in decades upholding a foreign marriage by

▸          A case upholding, on First Amendment grounds, an injunction
against Oklahoma’s “Anti-Shari’a” Amendment; and

▸          A case refusing to recognize a Japanese divorce, custody,
and child support judgment rendered in a bilateral proceeding because the
husband did not receive notice of a subsequent guardianship proceeding.



Current Affairs | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Symeonides' 26th Annual Choice of Law Survey:


Post a comment