Exxon Mobil Corporation v. William T. Drennen, Iii

How courts have described this case

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

• finding Texas’s interest in the issue that affects the employer and employee residing within its borders greater than Texas’s and New York’s shared interest in “protecting the expectations” of multi-state entities
• finding this section did not apply to whether the choice-of-law provision for an incentive program was enforceable due to similarity to the enforceability issue in DeSantis
• determining the most significant contacts without taking account of the choice-of-law provision
• finding Texas to have more significant relationship than New York when employer and employee were Texas residents and place of performance was Texas even though employee previously worked in employer’s New York office for three years
• noting that Texas recognizes the party autonomy rule
• “So while New York shares with Texas a general interest in protecting the justifiable expectations of entities doing business in several states, that does not outweigh Texas’s interests in this transaction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).