About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (April 2023 - August 2023)

handle is hein.ali/resctlw0162 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2023 Citations CONFLICT OF LAWS 2D Generally C.A.9, 2022. Cit. generally in disc. The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau brought an enforcement action against lender, CEO, and affiliated entities, alleging that defendants violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act by attempting to collect on loans that were invalid under state law. The district court entered judgment for plaintiff. This court affirmed in part and remanded, holding, inter alia, that, although defendants attempted to evade state usury regulations by issuing the loans from an office located on Native American tribal land, it declined to enforce the choice-of-law provision in defendants' loan agreements applying tribal law, because the Tribe did not have a substantial relationship to the parties and the transaction. The court noted that it looked to the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws as a description of federal common law regarding choice-of-law issues. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. CashCall, Inc., 35 F.4th 734, 743, 744. D.Conn.2022. Cit. generally in ftn. Homeowners' insurer sued insured, seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify insured against an action filed against her by the wife of a man with whom insured had a sexual relationship, in which the wife alleged that insured infected the man with a sexually transmissible disease that the man then passed on to his wife. This court granted summary judgment for insurer, finding that it had no duty to defend insured in the underlying action or to indemnify her from any damages arising from that action under Connecticut law. The court explained that Connecticut law applied under Connecticut choice-of-law rules and the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, because Connecticut, where the insured property was located, had the most significant interest in the policy. Homesite Insurance Company v. Brezniak, 581 F.Supp.3d 424, 431. D.D.C.2022. Cit. generally in sup. Government contractors who were injured in insurgent attacks in Iraq and contractors' family members sued the Islamic Republic of Iran, seeking to hold it liable for materially supporting the attacks. After Iran failed to defend itself or appear, this court denied family members' motion for a default judgment on their claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, holding that, under District of Columbia choice-of-law principles, their claims were governed by the laws of Great Britain or South Africa, as the law of the places where they were domiciled, and family members had not presented evidence of the laws of those jurisdictions applicable to claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The court noted that applying District of Columbia law would cut against the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws' focus on preventing forum shopping, respecting interested states, and ensuring predictable results. Roberts v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 581 F.Supp.3d 152, 173, 174, 176. COPYRIGHT C2023 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most