Erwin v. Thomas - 264 Or. 454, 506 P.2d 494 (1973)

Rule:

The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant relationship to the occurrence and the parties. Contacts to be taken into account to determine the law applicable to an issue include: the place where the injury occurred, the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred, the domicil, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business of the parties, and the place where the relationship between the parties is centered. These contacts are to be evaluated according to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue. A court, subject to constitutional restrictions, will follow a statutory directive of its own state on choice of law. When there is no such directive, the factors relevant to the choice of the applicable rule of law include the needs of the interstate and international systems, the relevant policies of the forum, the relevant policies of other interested states and the relative interests of those states in the determination of the particular issue, the protection of justified expectations, the basic policies underlying the particular field of law, certainty, predictability and uniformity of result, and ease in the determination and application of the law to be applied.

Facts:

The husband was injured in an accident with the truck driver. The accident occurred in Washington. The truck driver and his employer were Oregon residents. The husband and wife were Washington residents. Washington did not allow the wife to recover for loss of consortium. Pursuant to Or. Rev. Stat. § 108.010, Oregon permitted recovery for loss of consortium. The wife brought an action against the truck driver and his employer for loss of consortium due to the negligence of the truck driver and his employer. The truck driver and his employer entered a demurrer to the action. The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the truck driver and his employer.

Issue:

Did the Trial Court err in entering a judgment in favor of the truck driver and his employer?

Answer:

Yes

Conclusion:

The Court reversed the decision of the Trial Court and remanded for further proceedings. The Court determined that the state had adopted the "most significant relationship" approach to determining the law of which state to apply and that the interests and policies of neither state were vitally involved so that the Court applied the law of the forum.