Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Property, Exclusivity, and Jurisdiction

77 Pages Posted: 13 Mar 2014 Last revised: 6 Apr 2017

James Y. Stern

William & Mary Law School

Date Written: March 11, 2014

Abstract

Property has always been treated somewhat exceptionally in the realm of conflict of laws, but today conflicts rules for property are more unusual than ever — not because they have changed, but because they haven’t. Decades ago, most states discarded the general body of traditional conflict-of-laws doctrines, a transformation referred to as the Conflicts Revolution. Property, however, remains mysteriously untouched. The basic common-law principle is that property is governed by the law of its location — the situs rule. Despite persistent academic criticism, the situs rule is still followed in every state.

This article argues certain structural features of property support the situs rule, notwithstanding the Conflicts Revolution. Theorists have increasingly stressed property’s “in rem” quality — the idea that property is “good against the world.” This article shows how that feature creates a special need for uniform treatment across jurisdictions, such that a single, exclusive source of law is applicable to questions concerning the division of rights in a given asset. Property’s in rem character is a consequence of the allocational model used as the central organizing concept in property law. That model treats each property entitlement as part of a zero-sum game, in that one person’s entitlement to an asset means no one else can validly hold an incompatible claim to the same asset. Using different rules to resolve the same legal issue both aggravates the information cost problems generated by such a system and undermines its overall coherence. The situs rule in turn responds to the elevated need for uniformity in the property context by creating a focal point that enables states to coordinate their conflicts rules. The article shows how uniformity devices pervade property, including intellectual property and even other fields with certain formal resemblances, such as marriage and corporations law. Beyond its implications for issues of property jurisdiction, this article helps show where property’s much discussed “in rem” character comes from, what it really means, and how it distinguishes property from other private law fields like contract and tort.

Keywords: Property, Property Theory, private law theory, Conflict of Laws, choice of law, private, international law, in rem, Situs rule, land taboo, horizontal federalism, titling, jurisdiction, recording, renvoi, trusts

Suggested Citation

Stern, James Y., Property, Exclusivity, and Jurisdiction (March 11, 2014). 100 Va. L. Rev. 111 (2014); William & Mary Law School Research Paper No. 09-272. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2407722

James Y. Stern (Contact Author)

William & Mary Law School ( email )

613 S. Henry Street
Williamsburg, VA 23185
United States
757-221-1341 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://jamesystern.wordpress.com/

Paper statistics

Downloads
142
Rank
172,385
Abstract Views
812