When proving foreign law, which method is commonly recognized?

• A. Judicial notice of other state law
• B. Prove like facts
• C. If not proved: use NY law
• D. Ignore foreign law

Answer: (A)

Proving foreign law is treated as a matter of law for the court, and courts commonly take judicial notice of the laws of other states or foreign jurisdictions. When the relevant law is published and readily accessible, the court can rely on it through judicial notice rather than requiring formal proof. This keeps the proceeding efficient and avoids turning a legal rule into a contested factual dispute. If the foreign law is not readily ascertainable or disputed, the party may still present the text or an expert interpretation, but the default approach is to take notice of the foreign law as a matter of law. The other options don’t reflect the typical practice: proving the law as if it were a set of facts is needlessly burdensome, defaulting to NY law if not proved is not the standard method, and ignoring foreign law is incorrect.