Simon v. Philip Morris Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that fraud and consumer protection claims largely implicate conduct regulating laws
• stating that “the ‘last event necessary test’ does not displace New York interest analysis”
• noting that applying dépeçage can “result in the application to each issue of the rule of the state with the greatest concern in the determination of that issue” (quoting Reese, supra, at 60)
• “Choice of law rules apply equally to claims brought under common law and statutory law.”
• “[L]ike punitive damages, [general compensatory damages] may bear directly on the regulation of dangerous conduct within [a state’s] borders.”
• “This simple ‘last place’ criterion is not chiseled in stone but rather gives way when it is at war with state interests so that the more general Babcock principle [interest analysis] applies.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).