Lilienthal v. Kaufman
Oregon Supreme Court
395 P.2d 543 (1964)
Lilienthal (plaintiff) advanced funds to Kaufman (defendant) to finance a joint venture selling binoculars, and Kaufman executed two promissory notes in Lilienthal's favor, both executed and delivered in California. Unbeknownst to Lilienthal, Kaufman, an Oregon resident, had previously been adjudged a spendthrift by an Oregon court and placed under guardianship, and under Oregon law all contracts made by an adjudged spendthrift were voidable after guardian appointment; Kaufman's guardian declared the notes void. Lilienthal sued in Oregon court, arguing California law — under which spendthrifts remained bound by their contracts — should apply; the trial court ruled for Kaufman, and Lilienthal appealed.
Whether, where the interests of two states with conflicting laws are equally important, the court should apply the law that best promotes the policies and interests of the forum state.