Abstract
Prior to the Conference, five fact patterns raising complex jurisdiction and choice of law issues were presented to various academic experts. These academic experts then attended the Conference, where they communicated their particular point of view both orally and in print. Four of the five fact patterns were presented to theses panelists who in turn, acting as members of the judiciary, rendered judicial opinions. The fifth fact pattern was presented to elicit commentary rather than judicial opinion. Professor Borchers was one of the academic experts.