Among the places one might think to search for a Roger Williams law professor, the Bench of the French Supreme Court might not immediately come to mind – but that’s precisely where Professor Louise Ellen Teitz was to be found recently, alongside Justice Stephen Breyer of the U.S. Supreme Court and other worldwide legal luminaries.
They were in Paris as part of an ABA International Legal Exchange (ILEX) delegation headed by Breyer. During the exchange, Teitz addressed gatherings of arbitration experts and lawyers in London and Paris on the enforcement of international judgments.
High Profile Player
As one of the world’s leading experts on international procedure, Teitz writes and teaches primarily in the area of transnational and international litigation, which she defines as “litigation that touches on parties or facts that cross borders.”
Teitz has been a U.S. delegate to the Hague Conference on Private International Law for the Jurisdiction and Judgments Convention; a prominent leader in the ABA’s Section of International Law; and is now serving as chair of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Section of Conflict of Laws – a role she assumed when RWU was granted AALS accreditation in January 2006.
Such associations – among literally dozens of others – suggest why associate dean Michael Yelnosky describes Teitz as “RWU’s highest-profile international player.”
Teitz herself is more modest about her role, claiming that she sees her work mainly as a practical contribution to her profession.
“I firmly believe that academics have to be involved with practitioners,” she said. “It’s mutually beneficial, because it helps us deal with real-life problems, and not just theory.”
This philosophy is borne out in Teitz’s writings, which include scores of law review articles and book chapters, as well as her treatise, Transnational Litigation (Michie 1996 and Lexis Law Publishing 1999 Supplement), soon to be republished in a revised and expanded second edition entitled, Transnational Litigation and Dispute Resolution. Teitz is also co-author – along with Southern Methodist University School of Law Professor Peter Winship – of a forthcoming West textbook on conflicts of law.
Conflicts of Laws
Teitz – a native Rhode Islander who “never thought [she’d]
make it back here” until the School of Law opened in Bristol – said her interest in international litigation evolved out of domestic conflict-of-laws problems between states (for example, “a plaintiff from Rhode Island and a defendant from Massachusetts litigating a claim arising out of an automobile accident that happened in New Hampshire”).
While such cases still occupy a considerable amount of her time, an early-80s stint as an assistant professor at the University of Konstanz in Germany helped broaden Teitz’s interest to the international sphere.
Back in the 80’s, this was an “odd and eccentric” field of interest, she explained. “But today most transactions involve transnational elements – from Mercedes Benz cars to Sony laptops to corporate subsidiaries and their parents.
“These, in turn, raise issues of jurisdiction, choice of law, enforcement, and mechanisms for dispute resolution, among other things,” she said. “In legal education as well, there is an increasing movement to incorporate a global component in all courses.”
Leveling The Field
Teitz was a member of the U.S. delegation that
in June 2005 signed the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Choice of Court Convention, a legal instrument likely to have a major impact in commercial transactional planning.
The convention is currently in the hands of the State Department, which is drafting implementing legislation to send to the President, who must then recommend it for ratification by the Senate. Despite the long approval process, Teitz is confident that the treaty will eventually win passage and “offer a viable alternative to arbitration in the international context.”
“It helps create a level playing field for
international litigants,” she explained. “The U.S. enforces many more foreign judgments than foreign courts enforce U.S. judgments. I think of it as similar to the balance of trade being uneven. We essentially accept all of these imports – foreign judgments – but nobody wants to enforce U.S. jury awards abroad because they don’t like the punitive damages, and what they feel are overly large awards, because they do not understand [the American legal system in context].”
Teitz believes that an enhanced understanding
of international law offers lawyers a broader legal palette from which to choose strategically when litigating a case for their clients’ maximum advantage.
“Many lawyers and law students today have a
sense of the global culture and global economy – but not so much of how it practically affects day-to-day life and litigation,” she explained.
“Take for example, an accident involving a
Toyota car in the U.S.,” Teitz said, “There are a number of courts where suit might be brought, as well as different law that could be validly applied to such a case. Viewing one’s own system from a distance allows one to observe and critique in a positive way why a given court might or might not be [the best
forum for the case].”
Teitz added, “In a world where national borders
have less and less significance, we need to be aware that there are other
systems out there – and this awareness will open up wholly new and different approaches to the cases we handle.”
