Symeonides, Symeon C.

English

Louisiana State University: DigitalCommons @ LSU Law Center

Louisiana Law ReviewVolume 47 | Number 5Student Symposium: Conflict of Laws in LouisianaMay 1987Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A StudentSymposium: IntroductionSymeon C. SymeonidesThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted forinclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact kreed25@lsu.edu.Repository CitationSymeon C. Symeonides, Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A Student Symposium: Introduction, 47 La. L. Rev. (1987)Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol47/iss5/10Editor's Note:The preceding article by Professor Symeon Symeonides and the following studentsymposium refer to Louisiana Civil Code article 10 as the keystone of Louisiana'sconflicts law. The 1987 session of the Louisiana legislature, by virtue of Act No. 124,voted to redesignate article 10 as article 15, effective January 1, 1988. There Will beno changes in the substance of the article.LOUISIANA CONFLICTS JURISPRUDENCE, ASTUDENT SYMPOSIUM: INTRODUCTIONSymeon C. SymeonidesThis student symposium engages in a review of recent Louisianaconflicts jurisprudence in four major areas: torts, contracts, insurance,and liberative prescription. The symposium also attempts brief compar-isons with jurisprudential developments in the rest of the country. Oneof the authors' apparent conclusions is that we are no better off thanthe other sister states; that is, we are experiencing the same degree ofuncertainty or confusion that has characterized American conflicts lawfor the last thirty years.This uncertainty alone is a good enough reason for undertaking asymposium such as this. Another reason is the relative dearth of recentlaw review writings on Louisiana conflicts law.' Indeed, conflicts lawremains one of the most neglected subjects in Louisiana legal literature.Busy practicing attorneys have no particular incentive to delve into asubject that, for all its inherent complexity, promises little in the wayof immediate rewards; law teachers find more challenge in the nationalrather than the local conflicts scene; and student authors prefer to provetheir writing skills in subjects they learn before rather than during theirsenior year. This symposium attempts to fill this gap, if only in part.It may be worth mentioning that all the authors finished their contri-butions several months after graduation from law school. If for nothingelse, they should be commended for finding the time-amidst theirpreparation for the bar exam, the trouble of relocating to other cities,Copyright 1987, by LoUISIANA LAW REviEw.I. In the last ten years, only two contributions devoted to Louisiana conflicts lawhave appeared in the four Louisiana law reviews. See L'Enfant, The Work of the LouisianaAppellate Courts for the 1975-1976 Term-Conflict of Laws, 37 La. L. Rev. 444 (1977);Comment, Conflicts of Law and Successions: Comprehensive Interest Analysis as a ViableAlternative to the Traditional Approach, 59 Tul. L. Rev. 389 (1984). Rabalais, FifthCircuit Symposium: Conflict of Laws, 23 Loy. L. Rev. 775 (1977) is a review of federalcases.6LOUISIANA LA W REVIEWand the pressures of starting a new career-to fulfill their obligation tothis Review.The task of presenting Louisiana conflicts jurisprudence in a sys-tematic and meaningful fashion is as difficult as it is useful. The casesare few and far between. Only rarely does a judge get to write morethan one opinion on a conflicts subject. Consequently, judges have littleopportunity and little incentive to develop a consistent pattern of analysisfor conflicts problems. On the other hand, if only because they havethe luxury of choosing their own subject, academic authors are usuallyin a better position to see beyond the isolated case, to see the forestrather than the trees. To the extent they have been able to do so, theauthors of this symposium have rendered a true service to the overworkedbench and the busy bar.This symposium is a fitting way for Louisiana conflicts students topay tribute to one of the giants of the Louisiana bench, the great JudgeAlbert Tate, Jr. Although he did not consider conflicts to be one ofhis main fields of interest, Judge Tate did more than most judges inrecent Louisiana history to set Louisiana conflicts law on the path ofmodernization. While still a member of the Third Circuit Court ofAppeals, he wrote opinions which deserve to be included in any nationalconflicts casebook as models of perceptive and incisive analysis of con-temporary conflicts problems. 2 Despite repeated reversals by the Loui-siana Supreme Court, he continued to explore with his discerning eyeand his masterful pen the then unstable terrain of the American conflictsrevolution of the early 1960's.3 His intellectual independence and welljustified self-sufficiency protected him from uncritically accepting anyone of the then fashionable theories. Tate was mindful of Louisiana'speculiarities and respected its legislated choice-of-law rules. Unlike others,he did not ignore these rules but tried to instill new life into them byre-interpreting them in an enlightened way that reconciled them withmodern conflicts learning.4 This was, to be sure, the all-too-familiar2. See, e.g., Universal C.I.T Credit Corp. v. Hulett, 151 So. 2d 705 (La. App. 3dCir. 1963) discussed infra; Blanchard v. Blanchard, 180 So. 2d 564 (La. App. 3d Cir.1965) (concurring opinion); Doty v. Central Mutual Ins. Co., 186 So. 2d 328 (La. App.3d Cir.) (concurring opinion), cert. denied, 249 La. 486, 187 So. 2d 451 (1966).3. For a synoptic ex post facto view of this revolution see Korn, The Choice-of-Law Revolution: A Critique, 83 Colum. L. Rev. 772 (1983). For Tate's views on therevolution, see his contemporaneous approving review of the writings of one of therevolution's chief protagonists, Professor Brainerd Currie, in Tate, Book Review, 39 Tul.L. Rev. 163 (1964).4. See especially his opinions in Hulett, 151 So. 2d 705, discussed in Conflict ofLaws-Contracts: Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A Student Symposium, infra thisissue at 1181, 1197, and in Bell v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 680 F.2d 435 (5thCir. 1982), discussed in Conflict of Laws: Insurance: Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence,1106 [Vol. 47STUDENT SYMPOSIUMTate technique of pouring new wine into old bottles.- But it was alsothe only way for these archaic provisions of the Louisiana Civil Codeto sustain the pressures of modern multistate activity.When Judge Tate joined the Louisiana Supreme Court, his powerof persuasion proved instrumental in forging a new majority in favorof abandoning the old and mechanical rule of lex loci delicti in tortcases. 6 His contributions to conflicts law continued when he joined theUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, except that nowhe was making waves on the national conflicts scene.7 When one of hisdecisions proved to be more controversial than even he had anticipated,he responded to his critics in his inimitable way through a law reviewarticle which he titled, "Fisher v. Agios Nicolaos V and Choice of Law:What Was All the Fuss About? And What the Fuss Should Have BeenAbout (Maybe)."" The title of that article is just a small sample ofJudge Tate's wonderful, self-deprecating humor. The content of thatA Student Symposium, infra this issue at 1213, 1219. See particularly the following excerptfrom Bell, Louisiana Civil Code Article 10 provides thatthe effect of acts passed in one country to have the effect in another country,is regulated by the laws of the country where such acts are to have effect."In the case of an insurance policy issued in one state on an automobile thatwithin reasonable intention will be operated in interstate travel, the law of theforum state in which an accident occurs may be deemed to be the place inwhich the policy was intended to have effect and to have the most significantrelationship in determining the application of a standard automobile liabilitypolicy . . . particularly where the vehicle is principally located in such otherstate.680 F.2d at 436-37. Thus, in a single sentence, Tate was liberating Civil Code article 10from the rigid territorialist premises of its drafters and was introducing to Louisiana theflexibility that became the trademark of modern American conflicts law. He was alsodemonstrating that, in the hands of sophisticated judges, legislative choice-of-law rulesneed not be an obstacle to progress.5. For Tate's mastery in pouring new wine into old bottles, see, inter alia, hisfamous opinions in Holland v. Buckley, 305 So. 2d 113 (La. 1974) and Loescher v. Parr,324 So. 2d 441 (La. 1975). One of the earliest, less known "vignettes from the Tatelegend" is Sanders v. Hisaw, 94 So. 2d 486 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1957), discussed inYiannopoulos, Civil Law in Judge Tate's Court: Three Decades of Challenge, 61 Tul. L.Rev. 743 (1987).6. See Jagers v. Royal Indemnity Co., 276 So. 2d 309 (La. 1973) discussed in Couch,Louisiana Adopts Interest Analysis: Applause and Some Observations, 49 Tul. L. Rev.1 (1974); Choice of Law in Louisiana: Torts: Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A StudentSymposium, infra this issue at 1109, 1111. See also his concurring opinions in Deane v.McGee, 261 La. 686, 260 So. 2d 669 (1972) and Esteve v. Allstate Ins. Co., 351 So. 2d117 (1977).7. See especially Fisher v. Agios Nicolaos V, 628 F.2d 308 (1980), reh'g denied,636 F.2d 1107 (5th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, sub nom. Valmas Bros. Shipping, S.A. v.Fisher, 454 U.S. 816, reh'g denied, 454 U.S. 1129 (1981).8. 7 Mar. Lawyer 199 (1982).1987] 11071108 LOUISIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 47article, like his many judicial opinions on conflicts law, is a true gemof wisdom. He will be sorely missed for both.Finally, this symposium comes at an opportune time, that is, at atime that the Louisiana State Law Institute is engaged in a comprehensivelegislative reform of Louisiana conflicts law.9 This may mean that the"law" as presented in this symposium may soon become the "old law."But "old" is by no means "useless." Quite the contrary, as studentsof Napoleon's codification are acutely aware, the old law remains highlyrelevant, even when the new law purports to break completely from thepast and to begin with a tabula rasa.9. See, Symeonides, Exploring the "Dismal Swamp": The Revision of Louisiana'sConflicts Law on Successions, supra this issue at 1029.

Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A Student Symposium: Introduction

https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5058&amp;context=lalrev

Louisiana Conflicts Jurisprudence, A Student Symposium: Introduction

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Louisiana State University: DigitalCommons @ LSU Law Center