Also known as:advancement of the forum's governmental interests · forum governmental interests advancement · advancement of forum interests · governmental interest analysis · forum interests
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A choice-influencing consideration that directs a court to apply forum law when the forum state has a genuine concern with the facts of the case arising from its strongly felt social or legal policy.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
5
Indemnity Dispute Over Foreign Ingredients
South Lab supplied bulk ingredients to Clear Clinical under a European contract. Clear Clinical incorporated the ingredients into tablets sold to State A residents who later suffered injuries. When Clear Clinical sought contractual indemnity from South Lab in State A court, the court held that exercise of jurisdiction over the foreign defendant was unreasonable because the forum's interest in the ancillary indemnity claim between foreign corporations was slight.
Stacking Benefits Under Insurance Policy
After a fatal accident in Wisconsin, the victim's widow sought to stack uninsured motorist coverage under policies issued by Allstate. Minnesota courts examined whether Minnesota's policy of allowing stacking reflected a genuine governmental interest that should advance application of Minnesota law over Wisconsin law to the insurance dispute.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Casebooks
Study Supplements
Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hague449 U.S. 302, 308 n.11, 101 S.Ct. 633, 638 n.11, 66 L.Ed.2d 521 (1981)
Loss of Key Employee Services
A California corporation sued a Louisiana defendant after its vice president suffered injury on Louisiana premises. The court assessed whether California's interest in protecting its resident businesses from loss of essential personnel created a genuine governmental concern favoring application of California law to the tort claim.
A Mexican physician sued a DEA agent in federal court for alleged misconduct during an arrest in Mexico. The court evaluated whether the United States possessed a genuine governmental interest in applying its own tort standards to claims arising entirely from foreign harm.
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain542 U.S. 692 (2004)
Class Action Penalty Under State Statute
A medical practice sought to pursue a class action against an insurer for statutory penalties under New York law. The court considered whether New York's policy against class actions for penalties reflected a governmental interest that should advance application of the New York rule even when the underlying claims arose under the law of another state.
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co.559 U.S. 393 (USSC 2010)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
What makes a forum's concern genuine enough to advance its governmental interests?+
The concern must arise from a strongly felt social or legal policy rather than the mere occurrence of facts within the state or the existence of a local rule that could be applied. Courts look for legitimate state interests discoverable from the forum's policy commitments.
Supporting sources
How does advancement of the forum's governmental interests relate to the other Leflar factors?+
It operates alongside predictability of results, maintenance of interstate order, simplification of the judicial task, and application of the better rule of law. The factor receives weight when the forum has a real policy stake but does not automatically override the other considerations.
Supporting sources
Can this factor support application of forum law in a third-party indemnity action between foreign parties?+
When the dispute is an indemnity claim between foreign corporations, the forum's interest is attenuated because the underlying injury claims have already been resolved. Any state interest in the ancillary contractual allocation is typically slight.
Supporting sources
449 U.S. 302, 101 S. Ct. 633, 66 L. Ed. 2d 521 (1981)Conflict of Laws
…in terms of (1) predictability of result, (2) maintenance of interstate order, (3) simplification of the judicial task, (4) advancement of the forum’s governmental interests, and (5) application of the better rule of law. Although stating that the Minnesota contacts might not be, “in themselves, sufficient to mandate application of [Minnesota] law,”[^maj-8]…