Among the cases that have departed from the traditional jurisdiction selecting approach to choice of law, the majority opinion in Cipolla v. Shaposkal, is noteworthy in its refusal either to transmute interest analysis into insurer's liability or to identify the better choice of law with the better rule of law, even though the better rule it rejected was its own. It has also recognized that the mere presence in a state of a visitor from another state should not be the occasion for application of the latter state's law to discriminate in the visitor's favor-or, I think one may infer, against him. In so doing, it has displayed a proper concern for territoriality in the choice-of-law process. It has advanced the search for "conflicts justice."
David F. Cavers,
Cipolla and Conflicts Justice,
Duq. L. Rev.
Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol9/iss3/3