Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)

Citation: Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)
Parent Document: Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1990-09-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1757119/beltway-management-co-v-lexingt... ↗

Full Text

1,096 chars

By contrast, there are strong factors arguing in favor of applying District of Columbia law. As stated above, both parties have assumed in their briefs and at oral argument that D.C. law applies. The underlying events took place in the District of Columbia. Moreover, the District of Columbia has a strong interest in the resolution of this conflict because it affects the rights of a landlord doing business within the District and because it may indirectly affect the rights of the tenants of the Tyler House domiciled within the District. New York by contrast has little interest in this conflict because none of the parties to it are domiciled within that state. Because the District of Columbia has both a stronger interest in the resolution of this conflict and more significant contacts with the suit, under District of Columbia conflicts of law doctrine District of Columbia law should govern the construction of the insurance contract. See Hercules & Co. v. Shama Restaurant Corp., 566 A.2d 31, 40-41 (D.C.1989); Estrada v. Potomac Elec. Power Co., 488 A.2d 1359, 1361 & n. 2 (D.C.1985).

Other Sections in This Document (164)

Full Text