Erie Script

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

• 10th Amendment
• Supremacy Clause
• USC Art. III, §1
• Necessary and Proper Clause
• RDA – 1652
• REA – 2072

Question 2

STEP 1:

Answer 2

Determine if there is a Federal Rule on point. If so, is it in direct collision with state law?

Question 3

Is the text of the FRCP and the statute similar?

Answer 3

Walker

Question 4

Walker

Answer 4

Courts will often look to the text of each rule to determine the purpose or intention of the FRCP and the state law. Walker If the FRCP has a similar purpose, but a broader application, the FRCP will apply. If the state rule is broader, it seems more “bound up” and will apply. Even if the text is similar, it is possible that a FRCP will not come into “direct collision” with a state law and both can operate. Walker In Walker the state rule was integral to the tolling of the statute of limitations of this case so court held that the state rule applied.

Question 5

Does the FRCP grant discretion to a judge on the issue?

Answer 5

Burlington; Stewart

Question 6

Burlington

Answer 6

Courts tend to favor discretionary over mandatory rules because they do not want to take away a judge’s decision making power. Burlington If the FRCP is broader or discretionary, it will be in “direct collision” with state law and be on point. Burlington In Burlington the state rule was that penalties were mandatory in this situation while the FRCP provided the judge with discretion. Thus, there was a direct collision between state law and the FRCP and the court held that the FRCP applied because it was discretionary.

Question 7

Stewart

Answer 7

In Stewart the π and ∆ made a forum selection clause. When π filed suit in AL and ∆ moved for change of venue, AL district court held that AL state law of no transfer because of forum selection clause applied. The Supreme Court held that §1404(a) governed the case because a forum selection clause is only one factor in determining whether transfer of venue is proper. Stewart Thus, 1404(a) was more discretionary and applied.

Question 8

Is the state law bound up in substantive rights?

Answer 8

Shady Grove; Ragan; Walker

Question 9

Shady Grove

Answer 9

In Shady Grove the majority held that the state’s class action law did not apply because it only prevented certain types of monetary damages from being pursued whereas FRCP 23 may certify a class in each and every case where Rule 23’s criteria is met. Ginsburg said a state rule can co-exist with FRCP because the court failed to address state concern with keeping monetary awards reasonably bound up.

Question 10

Ragan and Walker

Answer 10

In both Ragan and Walker, the court held that state law controls when an action is commenced for purposes of the statute of limitations. Thus, state law was considered bound up in substantive rights.

Question 11

Are there additional requirements in the state rule that do not exist in the FRCP?

Answer 11

Cohen

Question 12

Cohen

Answer 12

In Cohen, the state law required a bond for a derivative action, but FRCP 23 did not. Therefore, state law applied because FRCP was silent on the issue.

Question 13

STEP 2:

Answer 13

If you decide the rule is “on point,” go REA pathway [HANNA]

Question 14

STEP 3:

Answer 14

If you decide there is no FRCP “on point” or in “direct collision,” go RDA pathway [ERIE}