Erie Doctrine Analysis Is this a case

Document Sample
Erie Doctrine Analysis Is this a case Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                                           Erie Doctrine Analysis


                                                                  Is this a case based on diversity jurisdiction?
                                                                          If No, then Erie does not apply.
                                                                                If Yes, then proceed


                                                        Does the state procedure have any substanitive elements to it?
                                                                   If No, then apply the Federal procedure.
                                                                              If Yes, then proceed


                                                  Would not implementing the state procedure encourage forum shopping?
                                                               If No, then do not apply the state procedure.
                                                                            If Yes, then proceed


                                            Would not implementing the state procedure result in the inequitable administration
                                                       of state law between the state courts and the Federal courts?
                                                                If No, then do not apply the state proceedure.
                                                                             If Yes, then proceed


                                                       Is there a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure addressing the topic?


                          Yes.                                                                                                                No.
       Rules Enabling Act of 1934 (REA) Analysis                                                                            Rules of Decisions Act (RDA) Analysis
              (Default - Federal law wins)                                                                                        (Default - State law wins)


                          1. Is the Federal Rule constitutional?                                                                   1. Is there a state policy bound up in the state rule?
                          If No, then apply the state procedure.                                                                                If Yes to both, then proceed.
                                    If Yes, then proceed                                                                                   If No to either, then apply Federal law.


                  2. Is the Federal Rule within the scope of the REA?
                          If No, then apply the state procedure.                                                                        a) Would applying the Federal policy encourage forum shopping?
                                    If Yes, then proceed



                a) Is the scope of the policy procedural in that it regulates the judicial process?                         b) Would applying the Federal policy result in the inequitable administration of state law?
                                      If No, then apply the state procedure.
                                               If Yes, then proceed


                     b) Does the policy abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive rights?                    2. Is there a countervailing Federal interest in seeing the policy implemented that outweighs
                                     (either Federal or state granted rights)                                     the encouragement of forum shopping and the inequitable administration of state law?
                                    If Yes, then apply the state procedure.                                                                    If Yes, then apply Federal law.
                                               If No, then proceed                                                                                   If No, then proceed

3. Is the Federal Rule specifically on point, that is, does it conflict with the state rule?                              3. Is there any way to accomodate Federal law by reconciling the two?
                           If No, then apply the state rule.                                                                                     If No, then apply state law.
                                  If Yes, then proceed                                                                                If Yes, then accomidate Federal law reasonably.


         4. Is there any way to accomodate state law by reconciling the two?
                     If No, then apply the Federal procedure as is.
                          If Yes, then accomidate reasonably.
Summary of Cases –

Erie – State substantive, Federal procedural (Who has the authority to make the rule over this?)
 |
 |
York – State procedure should be followed if outcome determinative. (Federal government is acting as a state court, so it should have the same
outcome as a state court would.1)
 |
 |
Byrd – Federal procedure when justified (Since it is still a Federal court, the Federal government can apply its procedure when necessary.2)
 |
 |
Hanna –        A. Outcome-determinative test is done in light of twin aims of Erie.
               B. A is irrelevant to this case since this was a FRCP. (Using Byrd – the FRCP is almost always a countervailing Federal interest3, so
               it‟s application will not be waived in favor of state procedure as would otherwise be prescribed by York.)
 |
 |
Gasperini – The Federal Rule must be reconciled with the state procedure (Federal Rule does not have as strong a presumption of victory as Hanna
               implies).

Klaxson – The Federal court must apply the choice-of-law rules of the state that it sits in. (Back to the principle of York.)
|
|
Van Dusen – If a case is transferred from one District to another, the choice-of-law rules of the state in which the original court sits are applied.4

Example of something that would lead to forum shopping but not result in the inequitable administration of state laws: New York‟s voir dire rules.
       In New York, the lawyers conduct voir dire, while in Federal courts the judges conduct it. This might result in forum shopping. However, it
will most likely not result in the inequitable administration of state laws.




1
  This goes way beyond what is constitutionally required. Here the Supreme Court is saying, „Yea, Washington has the authority to dictate procedure in its courts in Waco, Texas,
but we think that the suit should come out the same as if it was filed in a Texas state court. Thus, we are essentially waiving our rights to enforce a separate Federal standard.‟
2
  Here the court is saying, „Yea, we gave up some authority, but not all authority. So when we have something important to say, a “countervailing Federal interest” {ex. Ensuring
justice for racial minorities, etc.}, we will enforce it.‟
3
  This is because it is so difficult for a Federal Rule to come into creation. It goes through a long process involving over four different committees. If the thing can survive four
committees of politicos, then the Rule must damn near approach the „righteous law‟ of Athens and Rome that Justice Story talked about back in Swift at the beginning of this whole
mess.
4
  For example: If I sue Apple Computer in the DC Circuit and they have it transferred to the Northern District of California, the case will be tried in the Northern District using the
DC choice-of-law rule to determine which state‟s law will be used in the case.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:1064
posted:6/24/2011
language:English
pages:2
Description: How to Make a Law School Flowchart document sample