Auten v.

Auten

AUTHOR: FABI
PETITIONER: MARGARITE AUTEN
RESPONDENT: HAROLD AUTEN
TOPIC: CHOICE OF LAW

DOCTRINE: Center of Gravity/Grouping of Contacts Theory: The courts, instead of regarding as

conclusive the parties’ intention or the place of making or performance, lay emphasis rather upon the
law of the place which has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute.

FACTS:

 Margarite Auten sues Harold Auten in New York to recover support for her and her children that Harold
owed by virtue of a separation agreement.
 The Autens were married in England. Harold deserted her, went to America, obtained a Mexican
divorce, then married another woman.
 Margarite went to New York, where she and Harold came to a separation agreement which provided
that Harold was to pay to a trustee, for Margarite’s account, 50 pounds sterling (British currency) a
month for her support and that of their 2 children.
 The agreement also provided that they were not to sue each other in any action relating to their
separation, and Margarite would not cause any complaint against Harold in any jurisdiction because of
his alleged divorce and remarriage.
 Harold made a few payments only, so Margarite filed a petition for separation in England, charging
Harold with adultery.
 Harold was served in New York with process in that suit and he was ordered to pay alimony pendent
lite.
 This English case never proceeded to trial.
 Margarite instituted the instant suit to recover support due under the agreement.

ISSUE: W/N English Law and not Law of New York is applicable in the present case.

RULING+RATIO: YES. ENGLISH LAW is applicable in this case.

LEGAL BASIS:

The decisions in New York jurisprudence as to which law applies to contracts with elements in different
jurisdictions show several approaches. However, recent decisions have innovated by employing a method that
rationalizes the choice of law. This method has been called the “center of gravity” or “grouping of contracts”
theory.

Under the Center of Gravity/Grouping of Contacts Theory, The courts, instead of regarding as
conclusive the parties’ intention or the place of making or performance, lay emphasis rather upon the
law of the place which has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute.

It gives to the jurisdiction having the most interest in the problem, control over the legal issues arising from a
specific set of circumstances, allowing the forum to apply the rules of the jurisdiction most intimately
connected with the outcome of the particular case.

APPLICATION:

In the instant case, England has the most significant contacts with the case.

1. The agreement was between British subjects.

2. They were married in England.
3. They lived there as a family for 14 years.

1
 4. Harold abandoned his family and was in the US on a temporary visa.
5. Margarite’s sole purpose was to get Harold to agree to support their family.
6. The money was to be paid to a trustee in New York but those who stood to benefit live in England.
7. The agreement refers to British currency.

New York’s only connection to the case is where the agreement was made , and where the trustee to whom
the money was to be paid held office.

It is unlikely that Margarite intended to subject herself to the law of another state which she was not familiar
with. It is for the courts of that state to determine whether Margarite’s institution of a case constituted a breach
of their agreement.The Court noted that based on English law, there was no breach of the agreement by
Margarite.

SUMMARY:
The Autens were married in England. Harold deserted her, went to America, obtained a Mexican
divorce, then married another woman. Margarite went to New York, where she and Harold came to a
separation agreement which provided that Harold was to pay to a trustee. Harold made a few payments only,
so Margarite filed a petition for separation in England, charging Harold with adultery. Harold was served in
New York with process in that suit and he was ordered to pay alimony pendent lite. Margarite instituted the
instant suit to recover support due under the agreement.

CONCLUSION:
Therefore, English law must apply since England has the most significant contacts with the case.

DISPOSITION:
The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of Special Term insofar as they dismiss the complaint
should be reversed, with costs in all courts, and the matter remitted for further proceedings in
accordance with this opinion.