24 Cited authorities

The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.
407 U.S. 1 (1972) Cited 4,605 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts should enforce a choice-of-law clause when it is part of a "freely negotiated private international agreement"
Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Co.
313 U.S. 487 (1941) Cited 10,606 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Erie doctrine applies to conflict-of-law rules
Kossick v. United Fruit Co.
365 U.S. 731 (1961) Cited 619 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that admiralty law, not state statute of frauds, governed oral maritime contract
Lauritzen v. Larsen
345 U.S. 571 (1953) Cited 746 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that because " cause of action under [federal] law was asserted here, ... the [federal] court had power to determine whether it was or was not well founded in law and in fact"
Cooper v. Meridian Yachts
575 F.3d 1151 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 170 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a provision that covered "all disputes arising out of or in connection with" an agreement was "clearly meant to be read broadly"
Bloomfield v. Bloomfield
97 N.Y.2d 188 (N.Y. 2001) Cited 151 times
Applying section 203(d) to permit a wife's challenge to a 30-year-old prenuptial agreement propounded by her husband
Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc.
123 F.3d 1287 (9th Cir. 1997) Cited 132 times
Holding that "federal common law allows piercing of the corporate veil where a corporation uses its alter ego to perpetrate a fraud or where it so dominates and disregards its alter ego's corporate form that the alter ego was actually carrying on the controlling corporation's business instead of its own"
Albany Ins. Co. v. Anh Thi Kieu
927 F.2d 882 (5th Cir. 1991) Cited 145 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that, "in the absence of a specific and controlling federal rule," a marine insurance contract is "to be determined by reference to appropriate state law"
Flores v. American Seafoods Co.
335 F.3d 904 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 97 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a written contract must be read as a whole and every part interpreted with reference to the whole, with preference given to reasonable interpretations
Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC v. Durham Auctions, Inc.
585 F.3d 236 (5th Cir. 2009) Cited 50 times
Holding that choice of law provision in maritime contract applies unless party opposing provision shows chosen state has “no substantial relationship to the parties or the transaction,” or “state's law conflicts with the fundamental purposes of maritime law”
Section 213 - Actions to be commenced within six years: where not otherwise provided for; on contract; on sealed instrument; on bond or note, and mortgage upon real property; by state based on misappropriation of public property; based on mistake; by corporation against director, officer or stockholder; based on fraud
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 213 Cited 5,582 times 8 Legal Analyses
Applying six-year statute of limitations to actions "for which no limitation is specifically prescribed by law"
Section 203 - Method of computing periods of limitation generally
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 203 Cited 2,716 times 5 Legal Analyses
Providing that, in an action commenced by filing, "a claim asserted in the complaint is interposed against the defendant" upon filing

American Steamship Owners Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association, Inc. v. Dann Ocean Towing, Inc. et al

24 Cited authorities

Holding that courts should enforce a choice-of-law clause when it is part of a "freely negotiated private international agreement"

Holding that Erie doctrine applies to conflict-of-law rules

Holding that admiralty law, not state statute of frauds, governed oral maritime contract

Holding that because " cause of action under [federal] law was asserted here, ... the [federal] court had power to determine whether it was or was not well founded in law and in fact"

Holding that a provision that covered "all disputes arising out of or in connection with" an agreement was "clearly meant to be read broadly"

Applying section 203(d) to permit a wife's challenge to a 30-year-old prenuptial agreement propounded by her husband

Holding that, "in the absence of a specific and controlling federal rule," a marine insurance contract is "to be determined by reference to appropriate state law"

Holding that a written contract must be read as a whole and every part interpreted with reference to the whole, with preference given to reasonable interpretations

Holding that choice of law provision in maritime contract applies unless party opposing provision shows chosen state has “no substantial relationship to the parties or the transaction,” or “state's law conflicts with the fundamental purposes of maritime law”

Applying six-year statute of limitations to actions "for which no limitation is specifically prescribed by law"

Providing that, in an action commenced by filing, "a claim asserted in the complaint is interposed against the defendant" upon filing