Mid Term Flashcards
(27 cards)
Erie Doctrine
1) Procedural Laws = 2) Substantive Laws =
- Fed Law
2. State Law
Rules of Decision Act / RDA
The laws of the several states, except where the Constitution, treaties, laws control,
— shall be rules of decision in CIVIL ACTIONS
Swift Case
In Fed Ct and Fed Judges can interpret the law too thus “Federal General Common Law” - Fed Judge made law
Erie Case
Laws of Several States (LOSS) in RDA means State common law decisions too
State = substantive law
Fed = FRCP / Procedural Law
Dual Aims of outcome - Erie Doctrine
- Discouraging Forum Shopping
2. Promote Uniformity in Outcomes
Byrd Case
You Apply State Laws except where you have a Federal Constitutional Rule that addresses the same issue -
BALANCE- State Interests vs. Fed Interests
Rules Enabling Act
Supreme Court the power to make rules of procedure and evidence for federal courts as long as they did not “abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right.”
- Give courts the power to develop rules for federal courts
Hanna case
Hanna Two-Part Test Simplified
(1) If there is a valid Federal Rule on the subject, then
Fed Rule is to be applied.
(2) In the absence of a federal rule on the point the court is to consider the problem in light of the twin aims of the Erie rule,
(a) discourage forum shopping and
(b) avoid inequitable administration of laws. (Different results between state and federal courts.)
Reverse Erie
Fed law being applied in state ct
R 20
Joinder Parties:
(1) Ride along π:
- –> same STOO + a common matter of law/fact
(2) Multiple ∆:
- –> same STOO + a common matter of law/fact
R 18
Joinder Claims
R 13a
Compulsory Counter Claim
R 13b
Permissive Counter Claim - not STOO
FRCP 13(g)
Cross Claim - party may state claim against co-party.
STOO w/ original claim
FRCP 14
Impleading Third Parties ; Defendant brings in third party for
Contribution or Indemnity
R 19
REQUIRED Joinder of Parties / Must be if:
1. w/o the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties
~or~
2. they claim an interest + disposal would impede their rights or leave existing party possibly subject to multiple inconstant obligations
** the standards a court should apply in determining whether a lawsuit should go forward in the absence of a necessary party
R 22
Interpleader -
1. Expose the plaintiff to multiple liability
w/o defs even though claims lack a common origin or plaintiff denies liability to defs
- stakeholder
- claimant
(1335 = statutory)
R 24
Intervention -
[Wants to beak into litigation]
1, Of Right - claims right to property and disposing w/o would impede his rights to protect interest
- Permissive - has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.
1367
Supp JDX
- CNOF w/ other claim
REA - Rules Enabling Act
Supreme Ct can make rules of procedure and evidence (FRCP) and they are constitutionally valid
§ 1335.
Statutory Interpleader SMJ = ok $500+ Minimal Diversity Venue = wherever any claimant Per JDX = Nationwide Service of Process
Guaranty Trust v. York
Outcome determinative test
When is an absentee party a necessary party?
R.19
If one of the following is met:
- P can’t get complete relief without A,
- A’s own interests could be harmed if he’s not joined,
- without A, D might be subject to multiple obligations
When is it not possible to join a necessary party?
- When there is no PJ over A, or
2. When joining A would mess up diversity of citizenship in a case that is in federal court on diversity.