Legal Opinion · Dissent

Edwards v. Erie Coach Lines Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 30, 2011Published

1DissentCiparick, J.

Because I believe that a single analysis pursuant to Neumeier v Kuehner (31 NY2d 121 [1972]) should be applied where nondomiciliary defendants are jointly and severally liable to nondomiciliary plaintiffs in a tort action arising out of a single incident within the State of New York, and that under such an analysis New York law should *332apply to all defendants for purposes of uniformity and predictability, I respectfully dissent.

Neumeier sets forth a three-rule framework for determining what law should govern when there is a conflict between the laws of the domiciles of the parties or the state…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Neumeier v. KuehnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
  2. Cooney v. Osgood Machinery, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Miller v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
  4. King v. Car Rentals, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  5. Sullivan v. J.V. McNicholas Transfer Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API