SYMPOSIUM ON INTEREST ANALYSIS IN CONFLICT OF LAWS: AN INQUIRY INTO FUNDAMENTALS WITH A SIDE GLANCE AT PRODUCTS LIABILITY: To Brainerd Currie: A Fallen Giant. Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 1985 Ohio State Law Journal
Ohio State Law Journal

SYMPOSIUM ON INTEREST ANALYSIS IN CONFLICT OF LAWS: AN INQUIRY INTO FUNDAMENTALS WITH A SIDE GLANCE AT PRODUCTS LIABILITY: To Brainerd Currie: A Fallen Giant.

Summer, 1985

46 Ohio St. L.J. 529

Author

DONALD H. BERMAN *

Excerpt

Brainerd Currie once remarked that Walter Wheeler Cook "discredited the vested-rights theory as thoroughly as the intellect of one man can ever discredit the intellectual product of another." 1 Now Professor Lea Brilmayer has done the same thing. 2 By lucidly exposing the obfuscations that inhere within interest analysis, she has performed a consummate act of "trashing" that rivals the finest works of the most gifted critical legal scholars. 3

However, what has Brilmayer's trashing achieved? To jettison legal rules and theories merely because they will not withstand critical analysis would leave us in a state of anarchy. The issue is not whether Currie's view satisfies our sense of logic; rather, to utilize Professor Robert Sedler's variation of the classic Holmesian cliche, the issue is whether experience has shown interest analysis to be a workable theory. 4

Professor Brilmayer accurately asserts that interest analysis, both in theory and in practice, is "pro-resident, pro-forum, and pro-recovery." 5 She and other critics of interest analysis appear to have four objections to a "pro-resident, pro-forum, and pro-recovery" jurisprudence.

The first objection is that parochialism violates the Constitution. The parochialism that results from a reductionist extension of Currie's theory might, on occasion, violate constitutional limitations that inhere in our federal system. However, these limitations need considerable refinement before they stand as an indictment of interest analysis. First, the privileges and immunities clause does not protect corporate defendants from this exercise of parochialism. ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities