Some Hope for Choice of Law in Minnesota

Abstract

In March of 1994, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a noteworthy opinion in Conflict of Laws. In Jepson v. General Casualty Company of Wisconsin, a unanimous court issued an opinion that is striking and refreshing in its thoughtful resolution of a choice of law issue. This article focuses on Minnesota’s modern choice of law decisions up until the Jepson decision. It attempts to summarize the courts’ application of each of the five “choice-influencing considerations,” and offers criticism regarding each as well. The article then summarizes the court’s opinion in Jepson, demonstrating its contrast in tone and thoughtfulness from earlier opinions. The article ends with the hope that Jepson will not be an isolated exception in a river of unexceptional opinions – that the case constitutes the beginning of a choice of law jurisprudence of which the Minnesota courts can be proud.

Keywords: Jepson v. General Casualty Company of Wisconsin, Conflict of Laws, Choice-Influencing Considerations