choice-of-law analysis in New Jersey

2026In Camp Jaycee, the Court conducted a choice of law analysis where the plaintiff, a mentally disabled New Jersey resident, was sexually abused at the defendant summer camp located in Pennsylvania but owned and operated by a not-for-profit New Jersey corporation. 197 N.J. at 135-36 .

2025We are guided by the Court's opinion in P.V. v. Camp Jaycee, 197 N.J. 132, 142-43 (2008), where the Court held that Pennsylvania law was appropriately applied in a similar choice-of-law analysis.

2020"Warrantless seizures and searches are presumptively invalid as contrary to the United States and the New Jersey Constitutions." State v. Pineiro, 181 N.J. 13, 19 (2004).

2020"Warrantless seizures and searches are presumptively invalid as contrary to the United States and the New Jersey Constitutions." State v. Pineiro, 181 N.J. 13, 19 (2004).

2020See Moper Transp. v. Norbet Trucking, 399 N.J.

2020Id. at 154-55 .

2020See State v. Minter, 116 N.J. 269, 279 (1989) (noting a choice-of-law analysis is necessary where the search and seizure rules of the forum jurisdiction differ from the situs of the search or seizure).

2020See State v. Minter, 116 N.J. 269, 279 (1989) (noting a choice-of-law analysis is necessary where the search and seizure rules of the forum jurisdiction differ from the situs of the search or seizure).

2020Super. 250, 255 (App. Div. 1996) (citing D'Orio v. West Jersey Health Systems, 797 F. Supp. 371, 373-74 (D.N.J. 1992)).2 As such, we conclude that Travelers is liable to plaintiff for bodily injury coverage in an 2 We did engage in a choice-of-law analysis in one prior decision where the Deemer Statute applied.

2020Super. 250, 255 (App. Div. 1996) (citing D'Orio v. West Jersey Health Systems, 797 F. Supp. 371, 373-74 (D.N.J. 1992)).2 As such, we conclude that Travelers is liable to plaintiff for bodily injury coverage in an 2 We did engage in a choice-of-law analysis in one prior decision where the Deemer Statute applied.

2017Super. 333, 342 (App. Div. 2003) (citing Veazey v. Doremus, 103 N.J. 244 , 247- 49 (1986)).] "The first step in this choice-of-law analysis is an inquiry into whether there is 'an actual conflict' between the laws of this state and another." Lonza, supra, 359 N.J.

2017And, relying on Veazey v. Doremus, 103 N.J. 244, 248 (1986), where the Court observed that choice-of-law questions are "to be determined on an issue-by-issue basis," the judge declared that a choice-of-law analysis in those cases that might arguably be governed by the law of forty-four other jurisdictions would impose an undue burden on "the resources of the judiciary," which he rhetorically enumerated: First, is it likely that at the time of entering its [o]rder of May 2, 2005, our Supreme Court contemplated such an imbroglio being thrust upon our trial courts?

2017Specifically with respect to casualty-insurance contracts, our Supreme Court held that the choice-of-law analysis must first look to Restatement § 193 which "provides that the law of the state that 'the parties understood was to be the principal location of the insured risk . . . [governs unless] some other state has a more significant relationship under the principles stated in §6 to the transaction and the parties[.]'" Gilbert Spruance, supra, 134 N.J. at 112 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws, § 193 (1971)).

2003Id. at 111-12, 629 A. 2d 885 .

2025A similar result was reached in the pre-McCarrell case of Heavner v. Uniroyal, Inc., 63 N.J. 130, 133-34 (1973), where a choice-of-law analysis was applied in litigation resulting from a truck accident that occurred in North Carolina.

1973More recently the Supreme Court in Heavner v. Uniroyal, Inc., 63 N.J. 130 (1973), ruled that a New Jersey court would apply the foreign state's statute of limitations to a foreign cause of action on the facts present in that case.

2026"Nevada has a 'fundamental policy favoring the enforceability of arbitration agreements,' and [its courts] will 'liberally construe arbitration clauses in favor of granting arbitration.'" Uber Techs., Inc. v. Royz, 517 P.3d 905, 908 (Nev. 2022) (quoting Tallman v. Eighth Jud.

2026Although Nevada substantive law applies based on the parties' choice of law clause, where the FAA "governs an arbitration agreement, state courts are compelled to follow that act and any federal law construing it." Royz, 517 P.3d at 907 .

2025Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 234 N.J. 23, 46 (2018).

2025See Manalapan Realty, L.P., 140 N.J. at 378 .

2025A-0873-23 9 Finally, the principle of comity applies to the choice-of-law analysis by requiring the court to examine the public policy "of the forum state and the impact on that policy of enforcing the foreign proceeding." City of Philadelphia v. Austin, 86 N.J. 55, 64 (1981).

2025In determining whether to apply another state's laws as a matter of comity, other considerations apply: "(1) the convenience of the litigants and witnesses, as well as the interests of justice (forum non conveniens); (2) the dissimilarity of remedies in the different jurisdictions; and (3) the existence of conflicts with the local public policy of the forum." Ibid.

2024Dec. 4, 2020).2 After reviewing the federal judge's and magistrate's decisions in that case, the court "chose to follow the Third Circuit's precedent in Roadway [Package System, Inc. v. Kayser, 257 F.3d 287, 288-89 (3d Cir. 2001)] wherein the Third Circuit found general choice of law provisions shed little light on what law will govern arbitration provisions." Therefore, it reasoned, "the choice of law provision in the contracts in this case is not instructive as to the choice of law for the arbitration clauses." The court explained it also found a conflict existed between New York and New Jer

2022Under Section 6(1) of the Second Restatement, "[a] court, subject to constitutional restrictions, will follow a statutory directive of its own state on choice of law." Restatement (Second) § 6(1). 11 In Montells v. Haynes, the Court determined an injury under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination Act (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -50, is more akin to a tortious injury than to an injury arising from a breach of contract. 133 N.J. 282, 291-92 (1993).

2022Id. at 232-33 ; e.g., McDonnell v. Illinois, 163 N.J. 298, 299 (2000).

2019Because "jurisdiction over an out-of-state injury . . . becomes mixed with a choice-of-law analysis[,]" we have recognized that "[a]ny state having a more-than-casual interest in a compensable injury may apply its compensation act to that injury without violating its constitutional duty to give full faith and credit to the compensation statutes of other states also having an interest in the injury." Id. at 319 (quoting 9 Larson, § 86.00 at 16-55 (1997)); 7 see also Williams, 175 N.J. at 90 ("New Jersey generally will take jurisdiction and apply its Act when the State has a substantial interest

2017In conducting a choice-of-law analysis, "it is the forum state's duty to disregard its own substantive preference." Fu, supra, 160 N.J. at 131 (quoting O'Connor v. Busch Gardens, 255 N.J.

2017Co., 359 N.J.

2017Super. 333, 342 (App. Div. 2003) (citing Veazey v. Doremus, 103 N.J. 244 , 247- 49 (1986)).] "The first step in this choice-of-law analysis is an inquiry into whether there is 'an actual conflict' between the laws of this state and another." Lonza, supra, 359 N.J.