Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Under New York Choice of Law Principles, If Parties Assume or Agree That New York Law Controls, It Does

Tripoint Global Equities, LLC v. Fasolino, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150271 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2013):

Having resolved the usury counts, the next substantive issue is the legal malpractice claim against Weiss in Count One. Both parties assume that New York law applies to the legal malpractice claim, but they do not directly address the choice-of-law issue. "Under New York choice of law rules . . . where the parties agree that New York law controls, this is sufficient to establish choice of law." Fed. Ins. Co. v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 639 F.3d 557, 566 (2d Cir. 2011). Such agreement may be implicit. Id. The parties having assumed that New York law controls, under the New York choice-of-law rule, New York law applies. See Krumme v. WestPoint Stevens Inc., 238 F.3d 133, 138 (2d Cir. 2000).


Share this article:


Recent Posts