Opinion ID: 770056
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: New York's Interest

Text: 19 Coufal has not pointed to any activities that occurred in New York. Instead, he points to decisions made from offices in New Jersey and meetings that occurred in Atlanta. 2 The only reason behind Coufal's assertion that New York law should apply appears to be that AT&T's state of incorporation is New York. He argues that New York has an interest in regulating its resident corporations' conduct. However, a company's contacts with a state that are not significantly related to the cause of action at issue are an insufficient basis for the application of that state's law. Cf. McGhee, 871 F.2d at 1424 (California courts have rejected arguments that a party's contacts with California, unrelated to the cause of action at hand, create a basis for extending the reach of California's law.); id. at 1425 (California, despite its interest in securing recovery for its residents, will not apply its law to conduct in other jurisdictions resulting in injury in those jurisdictions.). 20 Because New York does not have a significant interest in applying its law, there is a false conflict  situation, and thus the district court correctly determined that the law of the interested jurisdiction, Mexico, should govern. McGhee, 871 F.2d at 1422. 21