The United States Supreme Court held that choice-of-law provisions in marine insurance policies are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law, rejecting in the maritime law context the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws rule that choice-of-law provisions are enforceable unless they conflict with "a fundamental policy of a state which has a materially greater interest than the chosen state" and holding that Pennsylvania's alleged public policy and greater interest in the instant dispute did not overcome the presumption that the policy's choice-of-law clause was enforceable.
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login