Conflict-of-laws rules exist to keep forum choice from altering primary law

Evidence

One of the uncertainties to which all kinds of primary activity are subject is the uncertainty about where, if at all, litigation challenging primary action will be brought. In the United States, litigation may occur in any one of forty-eight states, not to mention foreign countries, and in either a state or federal court. To assure that the place of litigation does not materially affect the primary law by which the relations of the pajities are determined is one of the main functions of the body of law conventionally known as the conflict of laws. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2959

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains the purpose of the conflict-of-laws doctrine in plain functional terms — useful reference for the legal-systems course.
• XREF: connects to: The contract clause bars depriving expected benefits, not imposing new burdens — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3007; Forum choice between state and federal courts favored corporate defendants — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2378; Litigants strategically select forums where procedural rules favor their cases — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 268

Broader Connections

• Forum choice between state and federal courts favored corporate defendants #exemplifies (0.85) — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2378