the state of the applicable law....”). ¶ 20 New Mexico is also the state where a significant part of the tortious conduct occurred because that is where Appellees purportedly engaged in defective construction and use of asbestos at the Plant. Restatement § 145(2) cmt. e (noting that state of injury likely to be state of conduct when issues involve standards of conduct as that state has natural concern in resolving such issues). We reject Mrs. Pounders’ contention that this factor should be discounted because Appellees chose to conduct their activities in New Mexico as its tort laws are favora e justified expectations of both businesses and injured parties that New Mexico law will apply in any lawsuit arising from conduct and injury in New Mexico. See Jaurequi, 986 F.2d at 175-76 (<HOLDING>). ¶ 22 Finally, in comparing the relevant
holding state as parens patriae takes strong interest in care and treatment of children within its borders recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties holding that missouri has interest in providing a forum for victims injured as a result of activities conducted within its borders holding that phone and facsimile communications to the forum purchase orders and payments sent to the forum a choice of law clause within the contract regarding the forum state and delivery of the product within the forum state were not enough to satisfy minimum contacts recognizing that with respect to regulating or affecting conduct within its borders the place of the wrong has the predominant interest