what law governs

Question 1

what is choice of law

Answer 1

princples and rules by which courts will decide the substnative law and rules of procedure that will govern an action

ie whether state or federal law applies in diversity acitons

Question 2

what was the swift rule, and the rule until erie overturned it? how did Justice story interpert ‘the laws of the several states’

NY law- if it applied, swift couldn’t use the BFP defense
Gen common law via the testament- the release of prior debt is consideration
So what law should be applied? We are in the NY fed court! So what should we do?

Tyson argued that the RDA required the court to apply New York law (ie state common law)

Answer 2

the rules of decsion act does not bind federal courts to state common law – Justice Story’s wrong interpretation of the RDA

he thought the phrase ‘the laws of the several states’ in the rda only referred to statutotu law NOT common law decided by state jugeges

Question 3

what does the RDA/1652 say (ie waht does each phrase mean)

Answer 3

the laws of the several states = the indiviudal states of the union

‘Except where the constitution or treaties..’= Ie where there is a fed statute/law that prevents state law from applying

‘Shall be regarded as rules of decisions in civil actions in the courts of the United states IN CASES WHERE THEY APPLY = Ie state law cases that end up in federal court (diversity cases)

Question 4

erie – key takeaway

Answer 4

The new rule under Erie – in addition to statues, judicial decisions are law

A federal court sitting in diversity must apply state substantive law, whether statutory or common law on SUBSTANTIVE issues!

Question 5

why did we have to get rid of the swift rule? ie the taxicab cases /forum shopping

brown and yellow wanted to efnorce a k with the railrods, but they knew that KY law did not enforce those ks

Answer 5

the swift rule created potential for manipulation of the kind that the taxi cases upheld

so brown reiencorpited in tn, thus creating diversity between them and the d, and because of the swift rule, the fed court was allowed to reach its own connclusion on the common law issue of whehter the k should be enforced

by invoking diversity jurisdction, the P was able to choose a substansive rule of law that uphled rather than barring their k

Question 6

erie – what were the two laws involved

Answer 6

PA law defining the guy as a trespasser, so no duty owed

Federal common law defining the guy as a liscenee, with duty owed

Question 7

what were the two problems with the swift doctrine

Answer 7

1. promotes forum shopping (picking the court with the most favorable law) – the taxi cab case
2. suggests that federal courts can create substantive laws – oversteps federalsim

Question 8

via erie, does the states substantive law or procedural law have to be appleid?

Answer 8

substantial

In a choice of law analysis, the court where an action proceeds has always had to prerogative to apply its own PROCEDURAL law, even though it is duty bound to apply the SUBSTANTSIVE law of the state

Question 9

what makes a law procedural or substantive accorining to york?

Answer 9

the outcome deterinitive test (that will be modifed in a later case via byrd)

would the selection of either state or federal law determine who would win the case

If yes=then the law of time limits on actions would be substantive enough to require the application of state law under Erie

If no= then the law would be seen as more procedural than substantive, and the federal courts would be free to apply their own approach to time limits

Question 10

what makes what makes a law procedural or substantive according to bryd (ie how does it modify the guarantee trust outcome determinative test)

SC law – let the jduge decide who was an employee (reason: thats just the way theyve alwasy done it)

Fed law – let the jury decide (reason: strong intrest in favoring jury decsions)

Answer 10

outcome determine test plus a balancing test

1. ask the outcome determinative question (whether the application of either state or federal law to the case would ALTER THE OUTCOME of the case on the merits )
2. ask as to whether any countervailing federal interest exsited that should be weighed against the state’s interest in seeing its law applied
3. conduct a weighing of these competing interests and determine whether to override the choice of state law

Question 11

what is the issue with gaurnety trusts outcome detemotve test?

Answer 11

almost every rule can affect the outcome, including procedural rules

Question 12

key takeaway from hanna part one (dicta but still good to know)

Answer 12

the outcome determintive test via byrd should be viewed in light of the twin goals of erie (ie rejects the york outcome test)

Twin goals of erie
Discouragement of forum shopping and avoidance of inequitable administration of the laws

Whether a litigant in one of those positions would choose fed court simply to capture the differnce in law

If someone WOULD HYPOTHETICALLY forum shop to capture that rule, then its substantive

Question 13

what is the erie question

Answer 13

would someone forum shop to capture this difference in law?

Question 14

hanna part two key takeaway (ie the rea analysis)

Answer 14

applies where there is a federal rule on the books in conflict with state law

have to figure out if the rule is allowed under the rea, if the conflict btween the state law is a true conflict, and if it actually regulates procedure – if all are yes then you can apply the federal procedreal law

Question 15

what is the rules enabling act?

Answer 15

the FRCP cant abridge, enlarge, or modify a substantive right

Question 16

what does the rules of decsion act analysis answer? aka hanna part one

Answer 16

applies where there is a fed common law

Does the RDA require state law application or does fed court have discretion?

answering the erie equal protection problem
default - either no fed law/rule that speaks on it or there is a fed rule but there is no conflict between fed and state law

Question 17

what does the rules enabling act analsysis answer aka hanna part two

Answer 17

whehter the federal rule is valid under the rules enabling act (ie it doesnt abridge, enlarge, or modify a substantive right)

Question 18

how do we know which track we are one (rules enabling or rules of decsion)

Answer 18

we ask as between the federal law and state law if there is a true conflict

if its a true conflcit – rules enabling!

if not a true confict – rules of decsion! So if its a FALSE CONFLICT, you still have to do a rules of decsion act (RDA) analysis to see if fed court can apply, or if state law has to apply

Question 19

draw the rea/rda flowchart

Question 20

hanna takeaway

service complied with frcp but d argued that the lawsuit should fail because service didnt comply with state law

Answer 20

FRCP applies

Question 21

if the conflcit between state and fed is the constuion which gets applied

Answer 21

federal law

Question 22

if the conflict between state and fed is a federal statute which gets applied

Answer 22

the fedeal statute as long as valid under the constiuion and rea

Question 23

what makes something a true conflcit

Answer 23

if it conflicts with the state law ie the fed rule allows one thing but state law says another

if you can interptet the fed law as not butting heads with each other, then you must move on to the rda analysis!

Question 24

what is the outline for choice of law analysis

Answer 24

1. deterine whehter the state and federal law conflict
2. determine the nature of the federal law (ie constiuonal, statuory, or fed rule)
3. if fed rule – apply the modfieed outcome determinative test (forum shopping test)