Massachusetts courts have, nevertheless, considered the location of events that constitute the alleged wrongdoing as essential for the substantial interest analysis. See, e.g., Nierman 808 N.E.2d at 697 ("all of the events constituting the alleged negligence took place in Texas"); Delfuoco v. K-Mart Corp., 817 N.E.2d 339 ("it was in Pennsylvania that all of the events constituting the alleged negligence took place, where the defendant operates a business . . ."); Ristaino v. D.C. Bates Equip. Co., 2004 WL 1171247 (Mass. Super.
Massachusetts courts have, nevertheless, considered the location of events that constitute the alleged wrongdoing as essential for the substantial interest analysis. See, e.g., Nierman, 808 N.E.2d at 293 (“all of the events constituting the alleged negligence took place in Texas”); Delfuoco v. K–Mart Corp., 817 N.E.2d 339 (“it was in Pennsylvania that all of the events constituting the alleged negligence took place, where the defendant operates a business ...”); Ristaino v. D.C. Bates Equip. Co., 2004 WL 1171247 (Mass.Super. May 12, 2004) (Massachusetts statute of limitation applied where New Jersey plaintiff was injured in New Jersey by a defective product produced in Massachusetts by a Massachusetts company).