About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (Fall 2025)

handle is hein.ali/reconlw0165 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Fall 2025 Citations CONFLICT OF LAWS Generally Kan.2024. Cit. generally in sup. and cit. generally in cases cit. in sup. Judgment creditor registered a Missouri judgment in Kansas and filed a request to garnish a bank account opened by judgment debtor and wife in Missouri as tenants by the entirety. The trial court denied debtor and wife's motion to quash, characterizing the garnishment as a procedural issue governed by the law of the forum state, Kansas, which did not recognize tenancy by the entirety, and permitted the garnishment to attach to debtor and wife's bank account. The court of appeals affirmed. This court reversed and remanded, holding that, for purposes of a choice-of-law analysis, the type of ownership interest that debtor and wife had in the bank account was not a procedural issue, but rather, a substantive issue that was governed by Missouri property law; thus, debtor and wife owned the bank account as tenants by the entirety and the account could not be garnished. The court explained that Kansas appellate courts traditionally followed the Restatement First of Conflict of Laws. M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Higdon, 556 P.3d 498, 500-502, 504-506. Vt.2024. Cit. in case cit. generally in ftn. Daughter sued, among others, mother's estate, alleging that mother, who died in Vermont, breached a contract for mutual wills that she had entered with father when they were living in Arizona by creating a new will that disinherited daughter. After a hearing, the trial court dismissed daughter's claims, finding that parents mutually consented to revoke their contract for mutual wills, because father had notice of mother's plan to create a new will disinheriting daughter and acquiesced to it through inaction. This court reversed and remanded, holding that father did not consent to rescission of the contract under Vermont law, which applied as the default because neither party met their burden of proving a conflict between Arizona law and Vermont law. The court rejected daughter's argument in favor of applying the doctrine of lex loci set forth in the Restatement of Conflict of Laws to determine the applicable law, explaining that the lex loci doctrine had been displaced by the most-significant-relationship test described in the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws. Inouye v. Estate of McHugo, 328 A.3d 1229, 1235. COPYRIGHT C2025 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.