Conflict of laws.  Inconsistency or difference between the laws of different states or countries, arising in the case of persons who have acquired rights, incurred obligations, injuries or damages, or made contracts, within the territory of two or more jurisdictions.  Hence, that branch of jurisprudence, arising from the diversity of the laws of different nations, states or jurisdictions, in their application to rights and remedies, which reconciles the inconsistency, or decides which law or system is to govern in the particular case, or settles the degree of force to be accorded to the law of another jurisdiction, (the acts or rights in question having arisen under it) either where it varies from the domestic law, or where the domestic law is silent or not exclusively applicable to the case in point.  Restatement, Second, Conflicts of Law, §2.  See also Center of gravity doctrine; Choice of law; Grouping of contracts; Kilberg doctrine; Lex celebrationis; Lex contractus; Lex fori; Lex loci; Lex loci celebrationis; Lex loci contractus; Lex situs; Lex solutionis; Lex validitatis; Renvoi doctrine.

"The principle thus applicable has been frequently stated. It is that the Congress may circumscribe its regulation and occupy a limited field, and that the intention to supersede the exercise by the State of its authority as to matters not covered by the federal legislation is not to be implied unless the Act of Congress fairly interpreted is in conflict with the law of the State.  See Savage v. Jones, 225 U.S. 501, 533 .
[Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 283 U.S. 380, 392 -393. ]

Reid v. Colorado, 187 U.S. 137, 148 (1902):

"It should never be held that Congress intends to supersede or by its legislation suspend the exercise of the police powers of the States, even when it may do so, unless its purpose to effect that result is clearly manifested." 
[Reid v. Colorado, 187 U.S. 137, 148 ]

Copyright Family Guardian Fellowship