Legal Definitions - presumption-of-identity rule

The presumption-of-identity rule is a legal principle that allows a court, when it needs to apply the common law of another state, to assume that the common law of that other state is the same as its own state's common law. This assumption holds true unless there is a specific statute in the other state that clearly establishes a different rule. Essentially, if a court cannot easily determine the specific common law (judge-made law, rather than written statutes) of another jurisdiction relevant to a case, it will apply its own state's common law to resolve the matter, simplifying the legal process. This rule is notably applied in states like Georgia today.

Here are some examples to illustrate the presumption-of-identity rule:

• Contract Dispute Across State Lines: Imagine a business based in State A sues a client from State B in a State A court for breach of contract. The contract itself doesn't specify which state's law should apply, and the dispute centers on a common law principle of contract interpretation, such as what constitutes an "implied warranty." If the State A court finds it difficult to ascertain the specific common law on implied warranties in State B, it would invoke the presumption-of-identity rule. The court would then apply State A's common law principles regarding implied warranties, assuming State B's common law on this matter is identical.

• Personal Injury Lawsuit from an Out-of-State Accident: Consider a situation where a driver from State X is involved in a car accident with a driver from State Y, and the accident occurs in State Y. The State X driver decides to sue the State Y driver in a State X court. The lawsuit involves a common law concept like the "duty of care" owed by drivers. If there isn't a specific statute in State Y that defines this duty differently, the State X court would apply its own state's common law standard for "duty of care," presuming that State Y's common law on this issue is the same.

• Property Easement Dispute: Suppose a dispute arises in a State C court concerning an easement (a legal right to use another person's land for a specific purpose, like a driveway) over a piece of property located in State D. The creation and interpretation of easements often have deep roots in common law. If the State C court needs to apply State D's common law regarding the proper way an easement is established or its scope, and there is no specific State D statute governing that particular aspect, the State C court would presume State D's common law on easements is identical to State C's and apply its own state's common law to resolve the dispute.