USA

USA

Description

In the USA, the study of conflict of laws is divided into three general categories: (1) judicial jurisdiction; (2) → choice of law; and (3) recognition and enforcement of judgments. Judicial jurisdiction relates to the authority of a court to adjudicate a case with respect to a particular defendant or defendants, and in the USA, judicial jurisdiction has both a statutory basis (which may be either state or federal) and a constitutional dimension of limitations imposed by the US constitution. As a result, decisions of the US Supreme court have a defining role in the area of judicial jurisdiction. Choice of law involves principles that determine the application of a particular law in a case when the case is other than a purely intrastate case. Rules on choice of law are generally the province of state (and not federal) law, with each state in the USA free to adopt its own choice-of-law approach. These principles must comply with obligations and/or limitations found in the US constitution, but the Supreme Court has only intervened rarely to impose federal constitutional norms with respect to choice-of-law issues. In most states, the basic principles of choice of law are developed through case law, and those principles apply to both interstate and international cases. The two Restatements on Conflict of Laws—the First (American Law institute, Restatement of the Law, First: Conflict of Laws, St. Paul 1934) and the Second Restatement (American Law institute, Restatement of the Law, Second: Conflict of Laws 2d, St. Paul 1971) (→ Restatement (First and Second) of Conflict of Laws)—have had a substantial influence on the development of choice of law, but the Restatements themselves have no status as ‘law’ until they are adopted by a state, usually in a judicial decision. Two states—Oregon and Louisiana—have codified choice of law in some areas with statutory provisions. In a few limited areas involving federal law, federal choice-of-law principles may be the source of the applicable law. Also, when federal statutes are silent on their extraterritorial reach, courts must decide whether or not the statute applies to foreign events or transactions. The recognition and enforcement of judgments encompasses the recognition and enforcement of both sister-state and foreign country judgments, although the principles are different. The recognition/enforcement of sister-state judgments is based on the constitutional obligation imposed by the → Full Faith and Credit Clause (art iV) of the US Constitution and is therefore a national federal standard applied by both state and federal courts. Judgments of other nations do not come within the Full Faith and Credit Clause; the principles of the recognition and enforcement of foreign country judgments are dictated by the law of the state where recognition and/or enforcement is sought. Many states have adopted one of two versions of a Uniform Act on Foreign Money Judgments (UFMJRA 1962 (Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (1962), 13(ii) Uniform Laws Annotated, West 2002) and the UFCMJRA 2005 (Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act (2005), 13(ii) Uniform Laws Annotated, Thomson Reuters 2016 (Supp)), which set forth grounds for the recognition and enforcement of foreign money judgments, although the Acts are occasionally adopted with variations, and the interpretation of the Act in each state is for its own courts. In non-Uniform Act states, recognition and enforcement is left to common law development. In some states a specific statute may be enacted for the judgments of a particular country. The one federal statute dealing with the recognition and enforcement of foreign country judgments is the SPEECH Act (Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, 28 United States Code Annotated SS 4101-4105, Thomson Reuters 2016 Pocket Part), which imposes certain restrictions with respect to the recognition and enforcement of foreign country defamation judgments. Custody and support judgments are the subject of specialized Uniform Acts (the UCCJEA (Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, 9(IA) Uniform Laws Annotated, West 2009) and the UIFSA (Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, 9(IB) Uniform Laws Annotated, Thomson Reuters, 2016 Supp)) adopted in every state; they apply to both sister-state and foreign-country judgments. Federal legislation also covers child custody and child support judgments, but those statutes are limited to sister-state judgments.

Source Publication

Encyclopedia of Private International Law

Source Editors/Authors

Jürgen Basedow, Giesela Rühl, Franco Ferrari, Pedro de Miguel Asensio

Publication Date

2017

Volume Number

3: National Reports A-Z

USA

Find @ NYU

Share

COinS