Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • Kamelgard Vs Macura Digest

    Transféré par

    Kelvin Zabat
    263 vues1 page
    Plaintiff, a surgeon in New Jersey, previously testified against defendant in a malpractice suit in New York. In retaliation, defendant sent defamatory letters about plaintiff to medical organizations in Chicago and Florida. Plaintiff filed suit in federal court in Chicago. The court held that New York law applies, not the law of the place of the wrong (lex loci delicti). The court will use the most significant relationship test instead, determining that New York has the most significant relationship because that is where the plaintiff works and lives, and where the principal injury from defamation would occur through impacts to his personal and business relationships.

    Description originale:

    Titre original

    Kamelgard vs Macura digest.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formats disponibles

    DOCX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    Plaintiff, a surgeon in New Jersey, previously testified against defendant in a malpractice suit in New York. In retaliation, defendant sent defamatory letters about plaintiff to medical organizations in Chicago and Florida. Plaintiff filed suit in federal court in Chicago. The court held that New York law applies, not the law of the place of the wrong (lex loci delicti). The court will use the most significant relationship test instead, determining that New York has the most significant relationship because that is where the plaintiff works and lives, and where the principal injury from defamation would occur through impacts to his personal and business relationships.

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme DOCX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    263 vues1 page

    Kamelgard Vs Macura Digest

    Transféré par

    Kelvin Zabat
    Plaintiff, a surgeon in New Jersey, previously testified against defendant in a malpractice suit in New York. In retaliation, defendant sent defamatory letters about plaintiff to medical organizations in Chicago and Florida. Plaintiff filed suit in federal court in Chicago. The court held that New York law applies, not the law of the place of the wrong (lex loci delicti). The court will use the most significant relationship test instead, determining that New York has the most significant relationship because that is where the plaintiff works and lives, and where the principal injury from defamation would occur through impacts to his personal and business relationships.

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme DOCX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 1

    Kamelgard v Macura

    FACTS: Plaintiff is a Bariatric Surgeon practicing in New Jersey, who previously


    testified against the defendant in a Malpractice suit in New York. The latter
    retaliated by sending defamatory letters to American College of Surgeon in
    Chicago and American Society Of Bariatric Surgeon in Florida. Plaintiff files a suit
    in Federal court of Chicago.

    ISSUE: Whether New York or New Jersey law applies?

    HELD: New York law applies. Lex Loci delicti will not apply but rather the court will
    use the most significant relationship rule.

    It is where the principal injury from defamation will occur because it is where the
    victim works and lives and where most of the people-family, friends, business
    associates, etc.- are found with whom he has personal or commercial transaction
    which might impaired by defamation.

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi