Pfizer, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “section 188 sets forth the general rule governing choice of law in contract actions”
• holding “the substantial weight given to the law of the waste site is not overcome,” and finding “[t]o apply New Jersey law would unduly conflict with the interests of commerce among the states”
• stating as general proposition that New Jersey requires a showing of prejudice before insurance can be denied due to late notification
• stating as general proposition that New Jersey requires a showing of prejudice before insurance can be denied due to late notification
• explaining how state-specific interpretations of “sudden and accidental” exceptions to pollution exclusion clauses in insurance contracts created a conflict of law issue
• summarizing the differences between New York’s and New Jersey’s interpretations of the “late notice” provision and the “pollution exclusion” exception

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).