## Facts

- Michael Gilbert, a Seton Hall University student domiciled in Connecticut, lived near campus in New Jersey while attending school.
- Seton Hall, a private nonprofit university in New Jersey, sponsored student-run “club sports,” including a rugby club operating under university authority with administrative assistance.
- The rugby club traveled to New York for a match; the field allegedly was poorly maintained, some opponents allegedly drank alcohol during the game, and no formal referee was present.
- No Seton Hall coach or faculty adviser accompanied the team.
- Gilbert suffered catastrophic injuries during the match and became a quadriplegic.
- Gilbert alleged Seton Hall negligently failed to supervise the rugby club and its activities.

## Issues

1. Under New York choice-of-law rules in a diversity tort action, whether New Jersey, New York, or Connecticut law governs the availability of charitable immunity for Seton Hall.
2. Whether charitable immunity is properly treated as a loss-allocating rule for New York conflict-of-laws purposes.
3. Whether applying the governing law results in Seton Hall being immune from Gilbert’s negligence claim.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Seton Hall.
- Applying New York choice-of-law principles, the court held New Jersey law governed the charitable-immunity defense.
- Because New Jersey’s charitable immunity statute applied to Seton Hall, Gilbert’s negligence claim was barred.

## Legal Principles

- In a diversity case, a federal court applies the forum state’s choice-of-law rules.
- Under New York conflict-of-laws doctrine, charitable immunity is a loss-allocating rule (it determines who bears the loss rather than regulating primary conduct).
- For loss-allocating conflicts in tort, New York applies interest analysis and the Neumeier framework (as elaborated in Schultz), focusing on the parties’ domiciles, the jurisdiction with the greatest interest, and where the relationship between the parties is centered.
- The place of injury does not automatically control when the conflict involves a loss-allocating rule.
- A state has a strong interest in applying its charitable-immunity statute to protect resident charitable institutions from depletion of charitable assets through tort liability.

## Conclusion

Applying New York’s interest-analysis approach for loss-allocation rules, the court concluded New Jersey had the strongest interest because Seton Hall is a New Jersey nonprofit and the student-university relationship was centered in New Jersey; therefore New Jersey charitable immunity applied and barred the negligence suit.


Gilbert v. Seton Hall Univ., 332 F.3d 105 (2d Cir. 2003)