Erie Analysis

York: outcome-determinative test
  • Wouldn't choose court based on paper size...
  • So paper size is not considered "substantive" for purposes of the Erie analysis, as it does not influence the outcome.
Byrd: "bound up" with state-created rights/obligations; affirmative countervailing considerations
  • Only a "form and mode" if a state would not, for example, rethink tort law rules based on the issue.
  • If the state could make this argument, the is is "bound up"
Hanna: valid/on-point federal enactment? Forum shopping/inequitable administration?
(concurrence: primary private/out-of-courtroom activity)
  • Shouldn't impact "substantive" rights...
  • Analysis:
    • 1. Positive enactment in federal law (like FRCP)?
      • a. If yes = is Rules Enabling Act Constitutional? YES.
      • b. Does the federal rule comport with the law? Almost always YES.
    • 2. Is state practice "bound up" with substantive rights?
      • Yes = APPLY STATE LAW.
    • 3. Is it "outcome determinative"?
      • Yes?
        • Will induce forum shopping = APPLY STATE LAW.
        • UNLESS countervailing federal law...
          • Such as a judge vs. jury deciding an issue.
      • No?
        • FEDERAL LAW
View most interesting 'lawschool' photos on Flickriver

Related Notes

Related Commentary