The traditional choice of law rule for torts is that the law of the place of wrong is determinative of all substantive issues. This rule has been frequently criticized and has been rejected by the Restatement (Second), Conflict of Laws, and by a few courts, particularly those of New York. The successor to the traditional approach, however, has not been determined. Under the view of the Restatement (Second), the applicable substantive law is that law of the state which has the most significant relationship with the occurrence and with the parties. Although a qualitative approach would seem possible under this test, a quantitative approach has generally been utilized, adopting the law of the state with the greatest number of significant contacts. A qualitative evaluation, however, contemplates a weighing of the governmental interests growing out of the contacts and analyzing the relative significance of each contact in relation to the choice of law issue.
Michigan Law Review,
The Qualitative Governmental Interest Analysis: New York's Conflict of Laws Rules in Transition-George v. Douglas Aircraft , Co.,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol63/iss6/10