This is the Twenty-Ninth Annual Survey of American Choice-of-Law Cases. It was written at the request of the Association of American Law Schools Section on Conflict of Laws, and is intended as a service to fellow teachers and to students of conflicts law, both inside and outside the United States.This Survey covers cases decided by American state and federal appellate courts from January 1 to December 31, 2015, and posted on Westlaw by December 31, 2015. Of the 1,188 appellate cases that meet these parameters, the Survey focuses on those cases that may contribute something new to the development or understanding of conflicts law — and, particularly, choice of law. The following are some of the cases discussed:--Three Supreme Court decisions, the first declaring unconstitutional all state laws against same-sex marriages, the second interpreting the commercial activity exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, and the third further constricting the range of state law in matters relating to arbitration;--A Second Circuit decision resuscitating for now that court’s theory that corporations are not accountable for international law violations under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), and two decisions holding that the violations at issue did not “touch and concern the territory of the United States . . . with sufficient force”;--Two cases refusing to allow a Bivens action for an extraterritorial violation of the Fourth Amendment and an intra-territorial violation of the Fifth Amendment, respectively, and several cases upholding the extraterritorial application of criminal statutes;--Several cases refusing (and some not refusing) to enforce choice-of-law and forum-selection or arbitration clauses operating in tandem to deprive employees or consumers of their otherwise unwaivable rights;--A New York Court of Appeals case explaining why a New York choice-of-law clause in a retirement plan did not include a conflicts rule contained in New York’s substantive successions statute;--Several cases involving the “chicken or the egg” question of which law governs forum-selection clauses;--A New Jersey decision ruling on actions for “wrongful birth” and “wrongful life,” and several other cases arising from medical malpractice, legal malpractice, deceptive trade practices, alienation of affections, and, of course, traffic accidents, along with products liability cases involving breast implants and pharmaceuticals;--The first case granting divorce to a spouse married under a “covenant” marriage in another state, and a Texas case recognizing a Pakistani talaq;--An Alabama Supreme Court decision refusing to recognize a Georgia adoption by a same-sex spouse on the ground that the Georgia court misapplied its own law regarding subject matter jurisdiction;--A Delaware case holding that the Full Faith and Credit clause mandates recognition of a sister-state judgment that has recognized a foreign judgment, and does not allow examination of the underlying foreign judgment; and--A case recognizing a foreign judgment challenged on the ground that the foreign country did not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with due process.

中文翻译：

---

2015 年美国法院的法律选择：第 29 次年度调查

这是美国法律选择案例的第 29 次年度调查。它是应美国法学院协会法律冲突部的要求编写的，旨在为美国境内外的冲突法教师和学生提供服务。州和联邦上诉法院于 2015 年 1 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日发布，并于 2015 年 12 月 31 日在 Westlaw 上发布。在符合这些参数的 1,188 个上诉案件中，调查重点关注那些可能对发展或理解有新贡献的案件冲突法——尤其是法律选择。以下是所讨论的一些案例：--最高法院的三项裁决，第一项宣布所有反对同性婚姻的州法律违宪，第二个解释了《外国主权豁免法》的商业活动例外，第三个进一步限制了州法律在仲裁相关事项上的范围；--第二巡回法院的判决暂时恢复了法院关于公司不对国际法负责的理论外国人侵权法 (ATS) 下的侵权行为，以及两项判定所涉侵权行为并未“触及和涉及美国领土”的决定。. . 具有足够的力量”；--两起分别因域外违反第四修正案和域内违反第五修正案而拒绝允许 Bivens 诉讼的案件，以及支持刑事法规域外适用的若干案件；——第一个允许在另一个州通过“契约”婚姻结婚的配偶离婚的案例，以及承认巴基斯坦塔拉克的德克萨斯州的案例；——阿拉巴马州最高法院的一项裁决拒绝承认同性配偶在乔治亚州的收养佐治亚州法院误用了自己关于标的物管辖权的法律的理由；--特拉华州的一个案例，该案认为完全信任和信用条款要求承认已经承认外国判决的姐妹州判决，并且不允许审查潜在的外国判决；- 一个承认外国判决的案件，以外国没有提供与正当程序兼容的公正法庭或程序为由提出质疑。-- 阿拉巴马州最高法院以佐治亚州法院误用了自己关于标的物管辖权的法律为由拒绝承认乔治亚州的同性配偶收养的决定；--特拉华州的一个案件认为完全信任和信用条款要求承认已承认外国判决且不允许审查相关外国判决的姐妹国家判决；- 一个承认外国判决的案件，理由是该外国没有提供与正当程序兼容的公正法庭或程序。-- 阿拉巴马州最高法院以佐治亚州法院误用了自己关于主题管辖权的法律为由拒绝承认乔治亚州收养的同性配偶的裁决；--特拉华州一案认为完全信任和信用条款要求承认已承认外国判决且不允许审查相关外国判决的姐妹国家判决；- 一个承认外国判决的案件，以外国没有提供与正当程序兼容的公正法庭或程序为由提出质疑。——特拉华州的一个案件，认为完全信任和信用条款要求承认已经承认外国判决的姊妹州判决，并且不允许审查相关的外国判决；- 一个承认外国判决的案件，以外国没有提供与正当程序兼容的公正法庭或程序为由提出质疑。——特拉华州的一个案件，认为完全信任和信用条款要求承认已经承认外国判决的姊妹州判决，并且不允许审查相关的外国判决；- 一个承认外国判决的案件，以外国没有提供与正当程序兼容的公正法庭或程序为由提出质疑。