Erie Doctrine
The principle that a federal court exercising diversity jurisdiction over a case that does not involve a federal question must apply the substantive law of the state where the court sits
Erie Doctrine
Diversity Cases under Subject Matter Jurisdiction Requires:
1) Citizens of different states
2) Amount-in-Controversy (greater than $75k)
the purpose of venue
to ensure that litigatoin proceeds and trial is held in a relatively convenient place
Venue focuses on identifying the most convenient and efficient judicial district in which to litigate by looking at both locations of the parties, evidence, and witnesses
1441 and 1446
the purpose of civil procedure is to provide a _______, _______, and ________ means of litigating a civil dispute
just, efficient, economic
What three tests do we apply to Erie problems
Outcome Determinative Test
Sibbach Test
The Twin Aims
Balance State and Federal policy
the authority federal courts must have to hear certain types of disputes brought before it.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Gilberts Public and Private Factors
Private Factors
Ease of access to sources of proof (evidence, witnesses, etc.)
Availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and cost of obtaining attendance of willing, witnesses
Ability to view premises if the view would be appropriate to the action
Other factors make trial easy, expeditious, and inexpensive
Public Factors
Court congestion
The interest of having local controversies decided at home
The interest of having diversity cases in the forum at home with the law that will govern
Avoidance of unnecessary problems related to conflicts of laws or application of foreign law
The unfairness of burdening citizens in an unrelated forum with jury duty
The defendant must file notice of removal _________ from the day he receives the complaint or the summons, whichever is shorter.
30 days
the act delegates Congress's power to regulate federal court procedure to the Supreme Court in very broad terms
Rules Enabling Act
Twin Aims of Erie
Discouraging Forum Shopping
Avoiding inequitable administration of laws
Federal Courts are authorized to hear clams under _____, ______, ________, _________
1332
1331
1367
1441
Macmunn' s Private factors
1.Plaintiff’s choice of forum (unless balance of convenience strongly favors defendant)
2.Defendant’s choice of forum
3.Whether the claim arose elsewhere
4.Convenience of the parties
5.Convenience of the witnesses
6.Ease of access to sources of proof
Only ___________ may remove, and all _________ must agree to remove
defendants
In order to render a valid and binding judgment, a court must have...
When do we apply Hanna Part I
If there is no federal rule of civil procedure, promulgated under the REA or statute that covers the point in dispute, then you must perform the Erie Analysis
Federal Courts are courts of _______ jurisdiction and state courts are courts of _______ jurisdiction
limited, general
Macmunn's public facotrs
1.Transferee's familiarity with the governing laws
2.Relative congestion of the calendars of the potential transferee and transferor courts
3.Local interest in deciding local controversies at home
While doing a removal/smj analysis, what is the question you are trying to answer about the claim?
Could the claim have originally be filed in federal court
purpose of supplemental jurisdiction
promote efficiency in ligation. It allows federal courts to have jurisdiction over a claim that does not have its own basis of jurisdiction
When do we apply Hanna Part II
Where does SMJ authority derive from
Art. III Sec. 2 of the US Constitution and statutory enactments
there is a suit filed in federal court, but the judge believes it is more convenient to file in state court. However, a judge can’t transfer a claim filed in federal court to a state court, so their only option is a _____________ dismissal
Forum Non Conveniens
1441 invokes all of _________ to do the analysis.
SMJ
What problems did Swift create?
Encouraged forum shopping as parties selected between two different bodies of law.
led to inequitable administration of law, not all parties could engage in this type of federal v. state forum shopping