kaal:claim:2029983-033

The authors propose a rule under which, unless a transaction is unambiguously inside the United States, the transaction is not inside the United States if the parties have expressly stated that intent; this can be harmonized with both Morrison and the existing statutory framework.

rule would stipulate that unless a transaction is unambiguous- ly inside the United States, the transaction does not take place inside the United States if the parties have expressly stated their intent that it does not take place inside the United States.

Wulf A. Kaal, Richard W. Painter, Forum Competition and Choice of Law Competition in Securities Law after Morrison v. National Austral (2012), III.B. From Geographic Location Toward Choice of Law, p. 64
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2029983 · source PDF

Wulf A. Kaal, Richard W. Painter, Forum Competition and Choice of Law Competition in Securities Law after Morrison v. National Austral (2012). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2029983

• geographically ambiguous transactions only
• does not apply to transactions unequivocally inside the United States

designsupport: arguedlaw-and-legal-systems

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is fde2ff611420eb283cbb49a6b681a2ae8efa2b4603ae71480e2d91483f0295f2. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/2f260e75b63bcdd7...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-033.md | sha256sum