Opinion ID: 2300328
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: applicability of pennsylvania law

Text: The receiver asserted, and Blumberg conceded, on this appeal, that Pennsylvania law governs the validity of the alleged pledge of the Bevko, Inc. notes in question to Blumberg. The evidence is uncontradicted that the pledge, if any, was effected in Pennsylvania, and the obligations of Alrich, O'Hara and Corson were to be met there. Validity of a contract is to be determined by the law of the place of contract. Staedler v. Staedler, 6 N.J. 380, 389 (1951). Under the circumstances of the present case Pennsylvania law clearly applies. Cf. Mill Factors Corporation v. Guardian Trust Co., 107 N.J.L. 529 ( E. & A. 1931); see also Goodrich on Conflict of Laws (3 rd ed. 1949), sec. 110, pp. 321 et seq.; Stumberg, Conflict of Laws (2 nd Ed. 1951), chapter VIII, pp. 224, et seq.