Questions on the Introduction to Interest Analysis

1) How is choice of law in an interjurisdictional context like deciding a conflict between two domestic laws? Can we understand Currie as arguing that the processes are basically the same?

2) It is often argued that the best approach to determining the scope of a statute in a domestic context is to look to its plain meaning rather than the intent or policies of the drafters. What would happen if that principle were used to determine the applicability of a statute in an interjurisdictional setting? How would the plain meaning approach work in Milliken v Pratt?

3) Given that no interests are really implicated in the Milliken case by the forum and the place of contracting, we can simplify the choice of law analysis according to Currie as considering four scenarios:

a) a Massachusetts married woman guarantor, a Massachusetts creditor

b) a Maine married woman guarantor, a Maine creditor

c) a Massachusetts married woman guarantor, a Maine creditor

d) a Maine married woman guarantor, a Massachusetts creditor

What does Currie recommend for each of these scenarios? How can the law of the place of the contracting approach of the 1^st Restatement yield perverse consequences according to Currie?