Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 469767, member: 622"]
The writer's premise is correct and the courts use the same basic doctrines to resolve contract disputes.  The U.S., particularly New York's 2nd Circuit, is highly developed in contract law.  So much so that most of the country uses the same or extremely similar laws for contracts.  British law is comparable.  Most of the world uses British or U.S. laws to resolve international trade (contract) disputes, even when arguing in foreign jurisdictions (i.e. New York law applied though the hearings are in the Hague).  I say this to point out that contract law is stable and predictable, which explains why most lawyers agree the GOR really amounts to nothing more than a starting point for negotiations.  It is highly unlikely that the GOR is enforced as is by the courts.
 
Though it is true that courts have great latitude (thus you cannot guarantee an outcome), one principal is that courts be consistent with established law.  Obviously, if the GOR was upheld in trial court, an appeal would be made in short order. 
 
I agree with Scooch's opinion that state courts can get more emotional about issues.  However, if Texas, or Oklahoma, were to breach, they would seek to file first in their own states for that emotional factor.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?