Federal vs State Jurisdiction

Question 1

Smith v. Tyson - OLD RULE

Answer 1

Federal court in diversity in absence of state court – can determine their own law

Question 2

Erie

Answer 2

Erie Rule: federal court is bound by state and legislative law on matter on substance except where federal statute or constitution applies (no general common law)

State Substantive Law (exceptions)
Federal Procedural Law

Question 3

Two Erie Reminders

Answer 3

1. Erie is about VERTICAL choice of law
2. Does all state decisional law count? Are federal courts bound by state trial court of lower court decision when deciding if state court law applies? NO Erie only applies to STATE SUPREME COURT – has to predict what state supreme court would do but would look to what trial courts have done to predict

Question 4

Core Question when considering Erie?

Answer 4

The SOURCE of federal law is what matters

3 Sources:
1. Federal statute
2. FRCP
3. Federal judge-made

Question 5

Federal Statute Steps

Answer 5

1. Conflict between federal statute and state law?
   a) if no, apply both
2. If arguably conflicting, Erie says federal law should be applied for federal statute if RATIONALLY CLASSIFIABLE as PROCEDURAL

*This does mean that it can ALSO be classifiable as substantive!
Procedural - manner and means of enforcement

Question 6

FRCP

Answer 6

1. Is there a conflict?
   a) If no, apply both
   b) if conflict, 2 step analysis
2. If FRCP controls issue and conflicts with state law = REA
   - Rules Enabling Act Analysis
   1) Does FRCP comply with REA 2772(a) (is FRCP rationally capable of class as procedure?)
   2) Does FRCP comply with REA 2772(b) (modify, abridge, or enlarge substantive right?)
   - Incidental outcomes don’t count

Question 7

Judge Made

Answer 7

1. Is there a conflict with state law? (BC)
2. Hanna-Byrd Combo
   a) Does application lead to BIG 2 (forum-shopping and inequitable admin of law)? If so, apply state law
   b) UNLESS significant COUNTERVAILING FEDERAL INTEREST

(BC) = Big 2, Countervailing Interest

Question 8

Another source of federal law

Answer 8

U.S. Constitution

If US Constitution is in conflict with state law, you apply US Constitution

Question 9

Summary Judgment

Answer 9

Rule 56

• Moving party asking for summ judgment as MATTER OF LAW
• Appropriate if there is NO GENUINE ISSUE as to MATERIAL fact (for all elements of claim)
• Material Fact: affect outcome
• GENUINE MATERIAL FACT: IF JURY CAN REACH DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS

Additional Facts:
- Parties submit affidavits, no live hearing
- Summary judgment is NOT appropriate when there is COMPETING evidence & conflicting testimony

Question 10

Summary Judgment - How to Win

Answer 10

For plaintiff to get summary judgment in favor, must establish there is no genuine material of fact for EVERY element of his claim

For defendant to get summary judgment in defendant’s favor, defendant just has to establish there is genuine issue of material fact for ONE element of P’s claim

Question 11

Summary Judgment - Proof Standard

Answer 11

If your burden of proof higher at trial, in order to win summary judgment, you have to show more to get summary judgment granted

“Liberty Lobby”

Question 12

Summary Judgment - Burden of Proof Movant

Answer 12

Moving Party

• Moving party always bears initial burden of showing no genuine issue of material fact (“Celotex”)

Two ways to prove
1. Affirmative evidence - other party can’t prove what they need to prove at trial

2. Point to a specific part of record - that shows a lack of evidence which demonstrates that non-moving party won’t be able to prove an element of non moving prima facie case
   (Point to hole in record, e.g., it’s clear that “here” and “here” the plaintiff does not have evidence)

Non-Moving Party
Once the moving party satisfies the initial burden, non moving party:

SPECIFIC SHOWING = Has to show why a reasonable juror could find in its favor

Can ask for more time to conduct discovery to response to movant’s move for summary judgment