Characterization. substance/procedure Grant v McAuliffe (Cal. 1953)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CHAPTER 6 REVIEW Let the Games Begin
Advertisements

If a wrongdoer has injured another party, the wrongdoer will usually receive from the court: a. Imprisonment b. Hard labor c. A fine.
Law I Chapter 18.
Tort Law Part 2 Negligence and Liability. Negligence Most common tort Accidental or Unintentional Tort Failure to show a degree of care that a “reasonable”
2 Crimes & Torts Crimes Intentional Torts
JAMES RAY COLSON V STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA 60 Cal.App.3d 913 (1976) 131 Cal. Rptr. 895.
Tort Law – Unintentional torts
Mon. Nov. 25. claim preclusion issue preclusion.
Traditional choice-of-law approach for torts law of the place of the harm.
Grant v McAuliffe (Cal 1953). P ships goods in Mass using D as transport P received printed bill of lading which contains limitations on liability Under.
McMillan v McMillan (Va. 1979). JONES v RS JONES & Assoc (Va. 1993)
Grant v McAuliffe (Cal 1953). P ships goods in Mass using D as transport P received printed bill of lading which contains limitations on liability Under.
Traditional choice-of-law approach for torts law of the place of the harm.
Foreign Law in US Courts Move from “fact” to “law” Common law  Statutory innovations Issues How raised? How presented? Who determines? Role of judge?
CHARTERERS’ DEFAULT: Security and Discovery in the U.S. By Charlotte Valentin.
Wed. Jan. 8. traditional choice-of-law approach for torts law of the place of the harm.
Business Law. Your neighbor Shana is using a multipurpose woodcutting machine in her basement hobby shop. Suddenly, because of a defect in the two-year.
Unit 6 – Civil Law.
Chapter 16 Form of Contract Twomey, Business Law and the Regulatory Environment (14th Ed.)
Torts.
Civil Law Criminal Law Procedural Law Substantive Law Business Law
Mon. Feb. 10. Virginia cases McMillan v McMillan (Va. 1979)
The Modernization Commission's Approach To Illinois Brick and Indirect Purchaser Litigation Conference on International Cartels September 8, 2006 Jonathan.
Tues., Oct. 21. practice midterm Wed. 10/ Room 119 Thurs 10/ Room 141 Thurs 10/ Room 127.
Fri., Oct. 17. amendment 15(a) Amendments Before Trial. (1) Amending as a Matter of Course. A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course.
Negligence and Strict Liability. Products Liability The liability of manufacturers, sellers, and others for the injuries caused by defective products.
Negligence. Homework 20.1 and 20.2 – read Chapter and 20.2 – read Chapter 20.
Tues. Nov. 27. terminating litigation before trial 2.
Contract Law for Paralegals: Traditional and E-Contracts © 2009 Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ All rights reserved Relationship of Tort.
Torts A.K.A. civil law. What’s a Tort? Torts more or less means “wrongs” Refers to civil laws Based on both common law (decisions made by judges) and.
Mon. Jan. 27. characterization Levy v. Daniels’ U-Drive (Conn. 1928)
Chapter 09 Negligence and Strict Liability Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
McMillan v McMillan (Va. 1979). § 145. The General Principle (1) The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are determined.
 Crime – _______________________________ _______________________________________  Elements of a Crime: › A duty to do or not to do a certain thing ›
Chapter 3: Sports Torts. Tort Law Generally Tort = Personal Injury law Tort = Personal Injury law Latin: to “twist” or “twisted” Latin: to “twist” or.
Thurs. Feb. 4. substance/procedure Question of interpretation under 1 st Rest 1) caps on damages 2) certain rules of evidence or burdens of proof 3)
Thurs. Jan. 28. characterization Haumschild v Continental Cas Co. (Wisc. 1959)
Thurs. Feb. 11. Holzer Buchanan v. Doe (Va. 1993)
Lect. 2 1/14/2016. Personal jurisdiction Choice of law Recognition of foreign judgments Constitutional Sub-constitutional.
Tues. 2/2/16. characterization substance/procedure.
Crime-Tort Jeopardy Business Related Crimes Elements of a Crime Classify Defenses Elements of a Tort Types of Torts Civil Procedure $100100$100100$100100$100100$100100$100100$
Civil Law An overview of Tort Law – the largest branch of civil law Highlight the differences between tort law and criminal law How torts developed historically.
Tues. Jan. 19. traditional choice-of-law approach.
1 Ethical Lawyering Fall, 2006 Class 6. 2 MR 1.1 A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal.
TORTS: A CIVIL WRONG Chapter 18. TORTS: A CIVIL WRONG Under criminal law, wrongs committed are called crimes. Under civil law, wrongs committed are called.
CHAPTER 18 PART I Torts: A Civil Wrong. A Civil Wrong In criminal law, when someone commits a wrong, we call it a crime. In civil law, when someone commits.
Chapter Seven Factors affecting choice of remedies.
Tues. Feb. 16. pleading and proving foreign law Fact approach to content of foreign law.
Understanding Business and Personal Law Negligence and Strict Liability Section 4.2 The Law of Torts A person can commit an unintentional tort, when he.
Introduction to Environmental Law
Mon. Feb. 13.
Mon. Jan. 30.
Liability in negligence
Wed. Feb. 15.
Mon. Nov. 5.
Wed. Feb. 1.
Introduction to Civil Law
Law of Evidence Burden and standard of proof.
Lecture 6 Jan. 29, 2018.
Lecture 5 Jan. 24, 2018.
Lecture 10 Feb. 12, 2018.
Lecture 10 Oct. 3, 2018.
Media Law.
Lecture 6 Mon. Sept. 17, 2018.
Lecture 9 Feb. 7, 2018.
Lecture 7 9/24/18.
Lecture 11 Oct. 8, 2018.
Negligence Ms. Weigl.
Thurs., Sept. 19.
Mon., Oct. 28.
Presentation transcript:

characterization

substance/procedure

Grant v McAuliffe (Cal. 1953)

right/remedy?

outcome determinative?

intent of sovereign creating rule?

§ 592. Procedure In Court The law of the forum governs all matters of pleading and the conduct of proceedings in court. § 594. Mode Of Trial The law of the forum determines whether an issue of fact shall be tried by the court or by a jury. § 596. Witnesses The law of the forum determines the competency and the credibility of witnesses. § 597. Evidence The law of the forum determines the admissibility of a particular piece of evidence.

P ships goods in Mass using D as transport P received printed bill of lading which contains limitations on liability Under law of Mass, this bill is not sufficient to show that P assented to limitation Under law of NH, it is P sues D in NH Should court assume that liability is limited?

§ 595. Proof Of Facts (1) The law of the forum governs the proof in court of a fact alleged. (2) The law of the forum governs presumptions and inferences to be drawn from evidence.

P, in state Arizona, is injured by the alleged negligence of D. P sues D in state California. By the law of Arizona, a plaintiff has no cause of action until he has shown that his own negligence did not contribute to his injury. By the law of California, contributory negligence is an affirmative defense to be pleaded and proved by the defendant. Must P show freedom from contributory negligence?

Comment to 595 Thus, if a requirement concerning proof of freedom from fault exists in the law of the place of injury and if such condition is there interpreted as a condition of the cause of action itself, or as affecting the nature or amount of recovery, the court at the forum will apply the rule of the foreign state (see § 385). In such a case, the remedial and substantive portions of the foreign law are so bound together that the application of the usual procedural rule of the forum would seriously alter the effect of the operative facts under the law of the appropriate foreign state.

Section 412 The measure of damages for a tort is determined by the law of the place of wrong.

§ 606. Limitation Of Amount Recoverable If a statute of the forum limits the amount which in any action of a certain class may be recovered in its courts, no greater amount can be recovered though under the law of the state which created the cause of action, a greater recovery would be justified or required.

Such a limitation is imposed only by a statute; and it is a question of interpretation whether the statute qualifies the cause of action, applying therefore only to a cause of action created by the statute, wherever sued on; or whether it is to be construed as limiting the amount of recovery in any action of the type described brought in the state, wherever the right was created; or whether (as in some instances) it has both effects.

- Mass (place of plane crash) has a damage limitation of one million for wrongful death - suit is in NY state court - NY has damage limitation for wrongful death of $ ½ million - NY limitation procedural, MA limitation substantive - NY limitation procedural, MA limitation procedural only - NY limitation substantive only, MA limitation substantive - NY limitation substantive only, MA limitation procedural only

Marie v Garrison case Suit in NY concerning oral K entered into in Mo Both Mo and NY had a statute of frauds NY law said K’s “shall be void” if not in writing Mo law said no K action “shall be brought” if oral Which, if any, applies?

P enters into an oral K with D in Missouri No statute of frauds in Missouri But Missouri’s statute of limitations on contract actions is two years P sues D on the contract in New York 3 years after breach New York has a statute of frauds (substantive) for New York contracts But its statute of limitations is 4 years for contract actions

- Assume the NY limitation on damages is procedural, then MA limitation is substantive - P sues in NY state and gets that maximum of $500,000 - P then tries to sue in state court in DE for the extra $500,000 - claim precluded?

Kilberg v NE Airlines Plane crash in Mass Ticket bought in NY NY P, Mass D Mass limitation on damages for wrongful death Suit in NY Does the Mass limit on damages apply?