for defendants. See Restatement § 145 cmt. e. The record does not suggest Appellees chose to do business only in states with favorable tort laws. ¶ 21 As previously explained, see supra ¶ 15, the principles of certainty, predictability, and uniformity of result, as well as ease of application of law, favor New Mexico. Additionally, applying New Mexico substantive law furthers that state’s natural interest in regulating businesses that construct or distribute defective products within its borders and deterring such conduct. See Jackson v. Chandler, 204 Ariz. 135, 139, ¶ 17, 61 P.3d 17, 21 (2003) (recognizing that Arizona has significant interest in regulating conduct within its borders and deterring future tortious conduct); Jaurequi v. John Deere Co., 986 F.2d 170, 175 (7th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). And New Mexico has an interest in protecting
recognizing that a state has a legitimate interest in all insurance policies protecting its residents against risks an interest which the state can protect even though the state action may have repercussions beyond state lines holding that the state police is a state agency holding that state has interest in regulating businesses that distribute defective products in that state holding a state has a substantial interest in regulating the practice of law within the state holding pennsylvania statute regulating subrogation is a law regulating insurance