Jurisdictions may balance these concerns with the competing policies of encouraging investment and protecting defendants from excessive tort judgments. See Judge v. Am. Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1570 (11th Cir. 1990). The Restatement (Second) of Conflicts of Law will be referred to as the "Restatement (Second)" in textual sentences.
For these reasons, no rigid rules exist for resolving conflict-of-laws problems in wrongful death actions governed by the Restatement, requiring instead an examination of the interests created by the facts and circumstances presented in each case. See Judge v. American Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1568 (11th Cir. 1990). B. Interested Jurisdictions Under Section 145
And, as Judge Goodwin concluded in Eghnayem , "the facts also implicate the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts" because that's where BSC is headquartered. See 2014 WL 5386731, at *3 ; see alsoJudge v. Am. Motors Corp. , 908 F.2d 1565, 1569 & n.3 (11th Cir. 1990) (explaining that states have an interest in deterring the tortious conduct of their corporate residents). Second , because Ms. Goodnight has neither asserted a claim under Massachusetts's consumer-protection law nor sent a pre-suit demand letter, her punitive-damages claim—which would survive in Florida—would be barred in Massachusetts.
The two most important principles are the second and third—the policies of the forum state and the policies and interests of the other interested states. See Judge v. Am. Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1569 (11th Cir. 1990).
The parties agree that the Court must apply Florida's "significant relationship test" as set forth in the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws §§ 145 – 146 and adopted in Bishop v. Florida Specialty Paint Company , 389 So. 2d 999, 1001 (Fla. 1980). See Mot. at 3; D.E. 163 at 14; see alsoJudge v. Am. Motors Co. , 908 F.2d 1565, 1567–68 (11th Cir. 1990). The first prong of this test is to identify the sovereigns with interests in applying their laws to the present dispute.
This Court "is bound to apply the [choice] of laws rules prevailing in the forum state." Judge v. American Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1577 (11th Cir. 1990) (citing Trans Caribbean Lines, Inc., et al. v. Tracor Marine, Inc., et al., 748 F.2d 568 (11th Cir. 1984)). Thus, Florida's choice of law rules apply here.
The district court concluded that the substantive law of Mexico controlled the appellant's claim for wrongful death and because Mexico did not recognize such a claim the court dismissed the suit. 908 F.2d 1565, 1569, fn. 4 (11th Cir.1990). FN19. Id., 908 F.2d at 1567.
This district court sitting in diversity must apply the conflict-of-law rules of Florida, its forum state, to determine whether the laws of Florida or of the UK (applicable to England) should apply to Valentino's causes of action. See Grupo Televisa, S.A. v. Telemundo Comm. Group, Inc., 485 F.3d 1233, 1240 (11th Cir. 2007); Judge v. American Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1567 (11th Cir. 1990) (citing Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487, 496, 61 S.Ct. 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477 (1941)); Garcia v. Public Health Trust of Dade County, 841 F.2d 1062, 1064 (11th Cir. 1988) (stating that in conflict-of-laws inquiry, court must first determine whether the specific issue at hand [is] a problem of law of contracts, torts, property, etc."; second, the court must "determine what choice of law rule the state . . . applies to that type of legal issue"; and third, the court must "apply the proper choice of law rule to the instant facts and thereby conclude which [jurisdiction's] substantive law applies.") (quoting Acme Circus Operating Co., Inc. v. Kuperstock, 711 F.2d 1538, 1540 (11th Cir. 1983)). Florida applies the "most significant relationship" test outlined in the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws ("the Restatement") to resolve most conflict-of-laws questions, including questions concerning statutes of limitations in tort cases.
The first step in conducting the analysis is to determine which sovereigns have an interest in applying their laws. Judge v. Am. Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1568 (11th Cir. 1990). Once the interested sovereigns have been identified, the court must consider the threshold issue of whether there is a "true conflict" among the jurisdictions with an interest in a particular issue or merely a "false conflict."
" Id. As a result, "no rigid rules exist for resolving conflict-of-laws problems in wrongful death actions governed by the Restatement, requiring instead an examination of the interests created by the facts and circumstances of each case." Id. (citing Judge v. American Motors Corp., 908 F.2d 1565, 1568 (11 th Cir. 1990)). The Court agrees that because no party is advocating that the law of the Bahamas, where the underlying incident occurred, be applied to damages in this case, reference to the general conflict of law principles set forth in § 6 of the Restatement and the principles specific to tort claims set forth in § 145 of the Restatement should be used to identify the jurisdictions that possess the greatest interest in applying their compensatory damages schemes.