Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1964–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Edgar v. Mite Corp.green2 sentences2019We agree with the plaintiffs' characterization of their suit as a direct claim involving accountant fraud and misrepresentation that occurred in Illinois and reject the defendants' characterization of the suit as an indirect claim implicating the internal affairs of the Cayman Islands' hedge fund. ¶ 26 The internal affairs doctrine, which the accountants have relied upon and the trial court found was applicable, "is a conflict of laws principle which recognizes that only one State should have the authority to regulate a corporation's internal affairs-matters peculiar to the relationships among 2019We agree with the plaintiffs' characterization of their suit as a direct claim involving accountant fraud and misrepresentation that occurred in Illinois and reject the defendants' characterization of the suit as an indirect claim implicating the internal affairs of the Cayman Islands' hedge fund. ¶ 26 The internal affairs doctrine, which the accountants have relied upon and the trial court found was applicable, "is a conflict of laws principle which recognizes that only one State should have the authority to regulate a corporation's internal affairs-matters peculiar to the relationships among | 2 | 4 |
Vantagepoint Venture Partners 1996 v. Examen, Inc.green2 sentences2019"The internal affairs doctrine developed on the premise that, in order to prevent corporations from being subjected to inconsistent legal standards, the authority to regulate a corporation's internal affairs should not rest with multiple jurisdictions." VantagePoint Venture Partners 1996 v. Examen, Inc. , 871 A.2d 1108 , 1112 (Del. 2005). 2019“The internal affairs doctrine developed on the premise that, in order to prevent corporations from being subjected to inconsistent legal standards, the authority to regulate a corporation’s internal affairs should not rest with multiple jurisdictions.” VantagePoint Venture Partners 1996 v. Examen, Inc., 871 A.2d 1108, 1112 (Del. 2005). | 1 | 2 |
Nelson v. Hixgreen2 sentences2018See Nelson , 122 Ill.2d at 350 , 119 Ill.Dec. 355 , 522 N.E.2d 1214 . ¶ 26 The next step in the conflict-of-laws analysis is to consider these contacts in light of the principles listed in section 6. 2018See Nelson , 122 Ill.2d at 350 , 119 Ill.Dec. 355 , 522 N.E.2d 1214 . ¶ 26 The next step in the conflict-of-laws analysis is to consider these contacts in light of the principles listed in section 6. | 1 | 1 |
Lauritzen v. Larsengreen1 sentence2013The United States Supreme Court explained, “The purpose of a conflict-of-laws doctrine is to assure that a case will be treated in the same way under the appropriate law regardless of the fortuitous circumstances which often determine the forum.” Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571, 591 (1953). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Walter Kaczmarek and Theresa Kaczmarek v. Allied Chemical Corporation, United States Steel Corporation, and Ever-Tite Coupling Company, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007It was lex loci delicti–the law of the place where the tort occurred was the law applicable to the case.” Kaczmarek, 836 F.2d at 1057 . 2007It was lex loci delicti — the law of the place where the tort occurred was the law applicable to the case.” Kaczmarek, 836 F.2d at 1057 . | 2 | 2007–2007 |
Townsend v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.
green
2 sentences2018The factors appearing in section 6 that are relevant to this type of case are "the relevant policies of the forum"; "the relevant policies of other interested states and the relevant interests of those states in the determination of the particular issue"; and "the basic policies underlying the particular field of law." Townsend , 227 Ill.2d at 170 , 316 Ill.Dec. 505 , 879 N.E.2d 893 . ¶ 27 Our analysis is guided by three Illinois cases that have addressed interspousal immunity in the context of automobile accidents and conflict of laws. 2018The factors appearing in section 6 that are relevant to this type of case are "the relevant policies of the forum"; "the relevant policies of other interested states and the relevant interests of those states in the determination of the particular issue"; and "the basic policies underlying the particular field of law." Townsend , 227 Ill.2d at 170 , 316 Ill.Dec. 505 , 879 N.E.2d 893 . ¶ 27 Our analysis is guided by three Illinois cases that have addressed interspousal immunity in the context of automobile accidents and conflict of laws. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Maremont Corp. v. Cheshire
green
1 sentence2013Maremont Corp., 288 Ill. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Hofeld v. Nationwide Life Insurance
green
1 sentence2013After conducting the conflict of laws analysis set forth in Hofeld, 59 Ill. 2d at 528 , the appellate court reversed, finding that Illinois law applied. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Rosenmiller v. Bordes
green
2 sentences2001Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624, 645 , 102 S.Ct. 2629, 2642 , 73 L.Ed.2d 269, 285 (1982); Rosenmiller, 607 A.2d at 468 ; Libco Corp. v. Roland, 99 Ill.App.3d 1140, 1144 , 55 Ill.Dec. 334 , 426 N.E.2d 309 (1981). 2001In our view, Delaware's adherence to the internal affairs doctrine (see Rosenmiller, 607 A.2d at 468 ) satisfies both factors. *923 The internal affairs doctrine is a conflict of laws principle that prescribes that matters relating to a corporation's internal governance should be controlled exclusively by the state of incorporation. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Libco Corp. v. Roland
green
2 sentences2001Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624, 645 , 102 S.Ct. 2629, 2642 , 73 L.Ed.2d 269, 285 (1982); Rosenmiller, 607 A.2d at 468 ; Libco Corp. v. Roland, 99 Ill.App.3d 1140, 1144 , 55 Ill.Dec. 334 , 426 N.E.2d 309 (1981). 2001Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624, 645 , 102 S.Ct. 2629, 2642 , 73 L.Ed.2d 269, 285 (1982); Rosenmiller, 607 A.2d at 468 ; Libco Corp. v. Roland, 99 Ill.App.3d 1140, 1144 , 55 Ill.Dec. 334 , 426 N.E.2d 309 (1981). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.
green
2 sentences1996Thus, we see no distinction between the two cases that would cause us to depart from the Supreme Court’s reasoning that the choice-of-law provision merely represented a convenient substitute for the conflict-of-laws analysis that otherwise would determine what law to apply to disputes arising out of the contractual relationship (Mastrobuono, 514 U.S. at 59 , 131 L. 1996Thus, we see no distinction between the two cases that would cause us to depart from the Supreme Court’s reasoning that the choice-of-law provision merely represented a convenient substitute for the conflict-of-laws analysis that otherwise would determine what law to apply to disputes arising out of the contractual relationship (Mastrobuono, 514 U.S. at 59 , 131 L. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Miller v. Stauffer Chemical Co.
green
2 sentences1983The Miller court properly observed: “[S]tates have considerable power to adopt an appropriate conflict of laws doctrine in a situation touching more than one state.” ( 99 Idaho 299, 303 , 581 P.2d 345, 349 .) The legislature’s decision to apply Elinois’ limitations standards to actions involving Illinois residents, while applying the statute of limitations of the locus in actions involving nonresidents, is not an irrational exercise of power as Lee Way contends. 1983The Miller court properly observed: “[S]tates have considerable power to adopt an appropriate conflict of laws doctrine in a situation touching more than one state.” ( 99 Idaho 299, 303 , 581 P.2d 345, 349 .) The legislature’s decision to apply Elinois’ limitations standards to actions involving Illinois residents, while applying the statute of limitations of the locus in actions involving nonresidents, is not an irrational exercise of power as Lee Way contends. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
No. 17026
green
1 sentence1966Co. (9th cir.) 291 F.2d 132 , (applying Oregon law under a conflict-of-laws rule) ; Travelers Ins. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
State Ex Rel. Sullivan v. Cross
green
1 sentence1965Sullivan v. Cross, (Mo.) 314 S.W.2d 889 .) It is most generally stated, however, that the rule has its roots in a conflict-of-laws principle that the courts of one State should not interfere with the administration of a decedent’s estate which is subject to the control of the courts of another jurisdiction. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Harris v. American Surety Co.
green
1 sentence1964Harris v. American Surety Co., 372 Ill 361, 24 NE2d 42 (1939). | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.