04
Sep
The parties marshal the facets usually considered in choice-of-law determinations
Appellant’s Br. At 17-18.
Kaneff argues that “section 408 of Act 6, 41 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 408, governs selection of legislation with regards to the interest price and obligation. Here is the portion of the act that invalidates waivers and states expressly that Act 6 applies, ‘not withstanding every other law, ’ which definitely includes Delaware legislation. ” Appellant’s Br. At 18. DTL reacts that the Pennsylvania statute is inapplicable to that loan beginning in Delaware and created by a Delaware organization. It contends that unconscionability shouldn’t be equated with a simple policy for the state, citing a 1985 Pennsylvania Superior Court choice for the idea that unconscionability “was still a unique and undefined concept in Pennsylvania’s jurisprudence.
