Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC v. Durham Auctions, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the party seeking to invalidate a choice of law provision under section 187 did not meet its burden
• determining whether enforcing identical choice-of-law section in maritime insurance policy “would be unreasonable or unjust”
• “Assuming, arguendo, that this would be determinative, it has not been shown.”
• “[E]ither the general maritime law . . . or New York law, . . . governs the parties’ rights under the instant marine insur- ance policy.”
• “Durham argues that application of New York law would be contrary to fundamental policy of Mississippi. Assuming, arguendo, that this would be determinative, it has not been shown.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).