Schneider National Transport v. Ford Motor Co.

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 law of the forum state, Texas, 24 should apply because there was “no conflict between the substantive state law of Texas and 25 Pennsylvania”
• applying law of forum state, Texas, where Texas’s and Pennsylvania’s laws did not conflict
• “If the laws of the states do not - conflict, then no choice-of-law analysis is necessary.”
• “If the laws of the states do not conflict, then no choice-of-law analysis is necessary.” (quotation omitted)
• “If the laws of the states do not conflict, then no choice-of-law analysis is necessary.” (quoting W.R. Grace and Co. v. Continental Cas. Co., 896 F.2d 865, 874 (5th Cir. 1990))
• “If the laws of the states do not conflict, then no choice-of-law analysis is necessary.” (quoting W.R. Grace & Co. v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 896 F.2d 865, 874 (5th Cir. 1990))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).