Medline Industries Inc. v. Maersk Medical Ltd.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that choice of law provision in contract that stated \this agreement shall be subject to English Law\ did not mean that English law governed tortious conduct or other actions relating to their relationship
• contrasting broader “arising out of’ language with a clause which provided only that the “agreement shall be subject to English law”
• contrasting broader “arising out of’ lan guage with the clause at issue, which provided only that the “agreement shall be subject to English law”
• comparing broader “arising out of’ language with restrictive language in the clause at issue that the “agreement shall be subject to English law”
• “Because Maersk’s allegedly fraudulent statements were made in the agreement, Med-line’s claim for fraudulent inducement is dependent upon the agreement.”
• “[F]or choice of law purposes, a fraudulent inducement claim is considered to be dependent upon the contract and, therefore, subject to the choice-of-law clause, where the allegedly fraudulent statements were made in the contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).