Article by Luther L. McDougal III
Ever since the premises underlying the vested rights theory began to be seriously questioned about four decades ago, the quest of most choice-of-law scholars has been for a theory that would rationally select the intrastate law of a state with some relationship to the controversy to resolve choice-of-law problems. In recent years, a small but steadily increasing number of commentators are suggesting that such a quest is too limited because rational choice-of-law decisions frequently cannot be obtained by applying the intrastate law of a particular state, regardless of how it is selected, to resolve trans-state controversies. These commentators contend that potential choice should be expanded to include trans-state laws or solutions specifically designed to resolve trans-state controversies.
About the Author
Luther L. McDougal III. Professor of Law, Tulane University; B.A. 1959, LL.B. 1962, University of Mississippi; LL.M. 1966, Yale University.
Citation
53 Tul. L. Rev. 731 (1979)