LAW 607 Lecture Notes - Lecture 28: Federal Common Law, Erie Railroad, Diversity Jurisdiction
1 Jun 2020
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Erie: the supreme court revisited roda in erie railroad v. tompkins, 304 u. s. 64 (1938). Plaintiff, however, argued the federal court should apply the general or federal common law rule, which required the railroad to act with ordinary care: holding: the supreme court held that the lower court was obligated to apply. General common law that applied with equal force in all common law jurisdictions. Instead, the court indicated that each sovereign state created its own common law: federal courts and common law: the court also held that federal courts, unlike state courts, had no power to create general common law. Therefore, roda required the federal courts to follow the common law rules set out by the state courts. Constitutional underpinnings of erie: the court in theory could have reached its holding solely on the basis of roda. However, the court made it clear the result in the case was dictated by the u. s.
