Comment by Patricia A. Carteaux
A cry for reform of judicial choice of law doctrines has been heard from numerous scholars over the past several decades. Recognizing this need, many courts have succumbed to the pressure exerted by academics to modernize conflicts law. Changes began in tort cases, and eventually spread to contract cases. Family law and successions law, however, have been unusually resilient to reform.
Louisiana has joined the ranks of those states that have adopted a modern approach to choice of law. To date, however, the approach has only been applied in tort and contract cases. It is therefore unclear the extent to which, if any, this modern approach will be applied to succession law cases.
Most states have adopted some form of interest analysis to determine choice of law issues. Interest analysis generally entails judicial scrutiny of the interests of the states involved in a particular controversy. The basic goal of interest analysis is to apply the law that would promote the concerns of the state having the greatest interest in applying its law to the case. This would be particularly true if the law of the state having the greatest interest also promoted some of the interests of other states involved in the controversy.
This comment addresses the current state of conflicts of law in Louisiana's successions cases. The possible ramifications of interest analysis on the application of certain Louisiana succession concepts, particularly forced heirship, are also examined. Inherent in this endeavor is an inquiry into the relevant policies supporting forced heirship and an analysis of this doctrine's continued viability. Adoption of comprehensive interest analysis for choice of law in successions is proposed. It is submitted that the proposed approach would promote the policies underlying succession law in general, and forced heirship in particular. Finally, adoption of the proposed approach would allow flexibility, rationality, and justice in the particular case to prevail in a choice of law system that is currently characterized by the application of rigid, irrational rules.
About the Author
Patricia A. Carteaux.
Citation
59 Tul. L. Rev. 389 (1984)