Gershon v. Back

Summary

The court held that New York's plenary action rule is substantive for choice-of-law purposes because it protects vested contractual rights under an unmerged separation agreement and is integral to the cause of action. Connecticut therefore applies New York substantive law but Connecticut procedures to a registered New York matrimonial judgment, requiring denial of the plaintiff's motion rather than dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The judgment affirming the Appellate Court was affirmed.