Opinion
Cause No.: 1:09-CV-172.
November 20, 2009
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 9, 2009, a preliminary pre-trial conference was held in this case, during which the issue was raised of whether the law of China or Indiana applied. The parties were ordered to submit briefs on the matter, which they have now done. (Docket ## 17, 18.) Both parties agree that Indiana law should govern the present dispute. (Def.'s Mem. 5, Pl.'s Mem. 1.)
As a general rule, "[c]ourts do not worry about conflicts of laws unless the parties disagree on which state's law applies." Auto-Owners Insur. Co. v. Websolv Computing, Inc., 580 F.3d 543, 547 (7th Cir. 2009) (citing Wood v. Mid-Valley, Inc., 942 F.2d 425, 427 (7th Cir. 1991)). Furthermore, the Court finds that under the Indiana choice of law provisions, Indiana is the forum with the most intimate contacts to the facts of this dispute. See Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Recticel Foam Corp., 716 N.E.2d 1015, 1024 (Ind. App. 1999). The Court therefore confirms that Indiana law will apply to the present case.
SO ORDERED.