Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
JACKSON (1963) the occurrence or the parties, has the greatest concern with
the specific issue raised in the litigation.
FACTS: Miss Babcock (as guest) went with Mr. and Mrs. Jackson (as
hosts) to Canada for a weekend trip using the Jackson’s car. (All are In this case, New York has the greater and more direct
residents of Rochester, New York). Mr. Jackson was driving along concern than Ontario. The present action involves (1)
Ontario, Canada when he lost control of the car and went off the injuries sustained by a New York guest (2) as a result of the
highway. negligence of a New York host (3) in the operation of an
automobile, garaged, licensed and undoubtedly insured in
Babcock (guest) was seriously injured and consequently sued Mr. New York. In sharp contrast, Ontario's sole relationship with
Jackson (host) for Tort/ Damages in NY court. Jackson moved to
the occurrence is the purely adventitious circumstance that
dismiss the complaint on the ground that the law of the place where
the accident occurred there.
the accident occurred should govern. The law of Canada states that
any owner or driver of a vehicle is not liable for any bodily injury
(except if in the business of common carrier). New York's policy of requiring a tortfeasor to compensate
his guest for injuries caused by his negligence cannot be
doubted. This is attested by the fact that the State
Legislature has repeatedly refused to enact a statute
denying or limiting recovery in such cases.
When the signing occurred, Pratt (Defendant) was a resident of The “vested rights” approach to contract led to strange results such
Massachusetts and by the law of that state a married woman was as when a Mississippi woman, with full rights to contracts, was
statutorily incapable of acting as surety for her husband. allowed to void a purchase in Tennessee since Tennessee did not
recognize her contractual capacity.
The guaranty was mailed to Plaintiff in Maine, his place of business,
where he shipped goods as relied on.
It results that the wife of the appellee was, by the law of the
Philippine Islands, vested of a descendible interest, equal to that of
her husband, in the Philippine lands covered by certificates of title
Nos. 20880, 28336 and 28331, from the date of their acquisition to
the date of her death. That appellee himself believed that his wife
was vested of such a title and interest in manifest from the second
of said certificates, No. 28336, dated May 14, 1927, introduced by
him in evidence, in which it is certified that "the spouses Allison D.
Gibbs and Eva Johnson Gibbs are the owners in fee simple of the
conjugal lands therein described."