and New York plaintiffs sued under the laws of those states. In enacting statutes of lifornia interest that outweighs the other states’ interest in effecting their policy choices, and the Ninth Circuit has stated that under such circumstances, “California’s interest in applying its law to residents of foreign states is attenuated.” Mazza, 666 F.3d at 594. Consequently, the court concludes that it would significantly impair the interests of both Florida and New York if California law were applied to residents of those states. See id. (“These foreign states have a strong interest in the application of their laws to transactions between their citizens and corporations doing business within their state”); see also Hernandez v. Burger, 102 Cal. App.3d 795, 802, 162 Cal.Rptr. 564 (1980) (<HOLDING>). The impropriety of applying California law to
holding state as parens patriae takes strong interest in care and treatment of children within its borders 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 recognizing that with respect to regulating or affecting conduct within its borders the place of the wrong has the predominant interest holding that missouri has interest in providing a forum for victims injured as a result of activities conducted within its borders