Torts in the New York Court: A Dizzying Choice of Law Jurisprudence

June 2, 2010 by Leon Ruchelsman

Anyone who has dealt with New York’s tort choice of law jurisprudence can attest to how complicated and often unpredictable it can be.  The current regime is based on a series of Court of Appeals decisions which began with Babcock v. Jackson.[1]  The opinion by Judge Fuld discarded the traditional doctrine of the law that the site of the tort should govern any relief for the tort.[2]  In its place, the Court adopted the “‘center of gravity’ or ‘grouping of contacts’ doctrine . . . [which gives] controlling effect to the law of the jurisdiction which, because of its relationship or contact with the occurrence or the parties, has the greatest concern with the specific issue raised in the litigation.”[3] [....] Read More…