代写-宾夕法尼亚州法律选择的案例分析。宾夕法尼亚州的法律选择在很大程度上适用于基于多样性的诉讼，这意味着根据宾夕法尼亚州的法律选择，法院必须决定冲突是真还是假。如果案件存在虚假冲突，那么“只有一个司法管辖区的政府利益会受到其他司法管辖区法律适用的损害”(Morrissey and Graves, 2008, p.79)。当两个不同司法管辖区的法律没有差异时，亦适用。法院发现宾夕法尼亚州对法律的兴趣更大，并得出结论，该协议是在宾夕法尼亚州执行的。因此，不是国际法院的美国地方法院正在审理此案。
Plaintiff sued defendant for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment and tortious interference with business relations. Therefore, court that decided this case was the United States District court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania’s choice of law is significantly applied to diversity based actions This means that under the Pennsylvania’s choice of law, the court has to determine whether the conflict is true or false. If the case has a false conflict, then “only one jurisdiction’s governmental interests would be impaired by the application of the other jurisdiction’s law” (Morrissey and Graves, 2008, p.79). It is also applicable when no difference appears between the laws of two different jurisdictions. The court found that Pennsylvania has a greater interest in the law and concluded that the agreement was performed in Pennsylvania. Therefore, the United States district court which is not an international court is deciding the case.
The litigant comes from United States. The litigant is the person that comes under the lawsuit. The plaintiff who sues another person and the defendant both are considered as the litigants. In the given case scenario, the litigants are from the United States and Italy. The plaintiff is Viva Vino Import Corporation and the defendant is Farnese ViniS.r.l.
Exclusive distribution agreement is done between the supplier and the retailer. The word exclusive determines that the agreement is for special purpose. It is something that is not readily available for everyone. Under the Exclusive distribution agreement, the retailer provides exclusive rights to the supplier with a specific geographical location to supply the retailer’s product. Some of the most important aspects of the exclusive distribution agreement are:
The type of product that the supplier will be distributing.
What product will be competed against the product that is being supplied?
Who are the consumers and why they will buy the product.
What kind of retail options are available (Therapeutics, 2004).
The given sentence can be meant as the case applied by the plaintiff who is the citizen of United States. As per this sentence, the law will be directed according to the complaint of the plaintiff, while the defendant is from other country. If the plaintiff and the defendant both are from the same country, the court will not be under the trouble of deciding the law to govern the case. However, in the given case scenario, the plaintiff is from the United States. The case is also decided in the district court of United States, which was the problem for the court to determine which law should be applied to the plaintiff’s complaint。