Masello v. Massachusetts

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that parties' implied consent to Connecticut law establishes applicable choice of law
• holding that 11 U.S.C. § 522 does not prohibit state exemption scheme that “place[s] property beyond the reach of only certain creditors (i.e. contract creditors) while keeping the property within the reach of other creditors [i.e.] tort creditors”
• noting that “implied consent is . . . sufficient to establish the applicable choice of law”
• noting that “implied consent is . . . sufficient to establish the applicable choice of law”
• stating that where the parties’ briefs assume that a particular state law controls, “such implied consent is . . . sufficient to establish the applicable choice of law”
• explaining that where the parties’ briefs assume that a particular state law controls, “such implied consent is . . . sufficient to establish the applicable choice of law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).