Cothern v. Cothern

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that the vested rights approach fails to acknowledge that many jurisdictions may have legitimate interests in applying their own laws in a given controversy
• reasoning that the vested rights approach fails to acknowledge that many jurisdictions may have legitimate interests in applying their own laws in a given controversy
• declining to discard lex loci entirely and applying other choice of law principles where lex loci would produce “arbitrary, irrational result”
• incorporating the guidelines of the Restatement for those cases in which the doctrine of lex loci would produce an arbitrary and irrational result
• adopting the Restatement [Second] approach to determine the substantive rights and obligations arising out of a tort controversy
• explaining our refusal in Simaitis to apply place of injury rule because doing so would have “frustratefd] the legitimate expectations of the parties and underminefd] an important policy of this state”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).