Alice Berger, et al. - Page 36

                                       - 36 -                                         
          315, 319 (3d Cir. 1993) (Federal tax issue); Schoenberg v.                  
          Exportadora de Sal, 930 F.2d 777, 782 (9th Cir. 1991); Albany               
          Ins. Co. v. Kieu, 927 F.2d 882, 891 (5th Cir. 1991); Edelmann v.            
          Chase Manhattan Bank, 861 F.2d 1291, 1294 (1st Cir. 1988); Harris           
          v. Polskie Linie Lotnicze, 820 F.2d 1000, 1003 (9th Cir. 1987);             
          Pittston Co. v. Allianz Ins. Co., 795 F. Supp. 689-690 (D.N.J.              
          1992).9  Whatever choice of law rule we were to use, however,               
          whether it be the most-significant-relationship test of 1                   
          Restatement, Conflict of Laws 2d, section 6 (1971) or some other            
          test, New Jersey law would apply.10                                         


          9Restatements are used as sources for determining Federal                   
          common law rules in other areas besides conflict of laws.  Town             
          of Newton v. Rumery, 480 U.S. 386, 391-392 (1987) (contracts,               
          enforceability of release); Central States, Southeast & Southwest           
          Areas Health & Welfare Fund v. Pathology Labs., P.A., 71 F.3d               
          1251, 1254 (7th Cir. 1995) (restitution, trusts in ERISA case);             
          Burlington Northern R. Co. v. Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., 63               
          F.3d 1227, 1231 (3d Cir. 1995) (judgments, issue preclusion);               
          Moench v. Robertson, 62 F.3d 553, 566 (3d Cir. 1995) (trusts,               
          ERISA); United States v. Northrop Corp., 59 F.3d 953, 958-963               
          (9th Cir. 1995) (contracts, enforceability of release); Luden's             
          Inc. v. Local 6 Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers' Intl.              
          Union of Am., 28 F.3d 347, 354-355 (3d Cir. 1994) (contracts,               
          collective bargaining agreement in labor law); Livingstone v.               
          North Belle Vernon Borough, 12 F.3d 1205, 1210 n.6 (3d. Cir.                
          1993) (contracts, enforceability of release).                               
          10The result would be the same--and New Jersey law would                    
          apply--under New Jersey's choice-of-law principles.  On                     
          contractual issues, New Jersey uses the law of the place where              
          the contract was concluded, lex loci contractus, unless the                 
          most-significant-relationship test of 1 Restatement, Conflict of            
          Laws 2d, sec. 6 (1971) compels a different result.  NL Indus.,              
          Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 65 F.3d 314, 319 (3d Cir.                
          1995); Gilbert Spruance Co. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers'                  
          Association Ins. Co., 629 A.2d 885, 888 (N.J. 1993); Harleysville           
          Ins. Co. v. Crum & Forster Personal Ins., 588 A.2d 385, 387-388             
          (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1990); cf. D'Agostino v. Johnson &               
          Johnson, Inc., 628 A.2d 305, 320-321 (N.J. 1993).                           



Page:  Previous  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011