The Louisiana and Oregon Codifications of Choice-of-Law Rules in Context

Abstract

Although the common law tradition has not encouraged codifica tion of choice-of-law rules in the United States, all states have enacted statutory choice-of-law rules of some sort Important examples of these rules are found in probate law and enactments of the Uniform Com mercial Code. The chief purpose of such rules has been to stabilize expectations among contracting parties and others about the applica ble law in the event of a dispute with critical elements in more than one jurisdiction. However, only two states?Louisiana and Oregon? have enacted choice-of-law codes. These codes have drawn rules from a variety of sources, ranging from judicial decisions to European con cepts of private international law to contemporary dispute resolution theory. The two codes bear similarities, such as a coincidence of some of their territorial connecting factors, as well as differences, such as their definitions, scope, and general or default rules. Provisions appli cable to contracts, torts, and other non-contractual obligations, on which this study focuses, are particularly significant. An analysis of these provisions reveals efforts to reconcile the objective of interstate and international uniformity with the community values and expecta tions within each state, respectively. As a result, the two codifications reflect emerging patterns of judicial decisions as well as divergent and innovative prescriptions.