Regarding Erie v. Tomkins

 

What was the rule of decision as to which a conflict existed?

Whether to use PA or NY law
The standard of care as to trespassers
Whether to use state or federal law
Whether the railroad or an individual employee was responsible
What two sovereigns offered conflicting rules?

NY and PA
Federal government and PA
US and general common law
PA and general common law
How does forum-sovereign law come into play?

The federal sovereign must decide whether to use federal or state law
The federal court considers itself an agent of the state sovereign
Railroads are a federal issue because they run interstate
The court sat in NY
Characterize Erie as a "false conflict," if you can. Did either party argue that?

PA law may have been the same as "general federal common law"; no; neither party argued false conflict
PA law may have been the same as "general federal common law"; yes; the plaintiff argued false conflict
PA law was the same as NY law, but no one thought of that

It's not a false conflict

What was the choice-of-law rule asserted by the railroad?

Lex loci delicti
Governmental interests
Lex loci rei sitae
Best rule of law
What is its source?
PA common law
General principles of international jurisprudence
Brooding omnipresence in the sky
NY common law
Why do Brandeis and Story interpret the Rules of Decision Act

differently?

Story assumed that the Act only required deference to state statutes; Brandeis assumed that the Act required deference to state common law
Story preferred lex loci delicti; Brandeis preferring governmental interests analysis
Story was focused on international issues; Brandeis was a strict constructionist of the U.S. constitution
Brandeis sought a particular result because of his commitment to "Brandeis briefs"
How does constitutional power come into play in Justice Brandeis'

analysis?
He cannot find any constituional source of power to make general federal common law
The 11th Amendment protects state power
The constitution does not address railroads
Procedural due process was violated by the lower court decision
Is it true that Congress lacks the power to legislate with respect to
commercial law? If true, why should this matter?

No; Congress has power under the Commerce Clause
The Commerce Clause was read much more narrowly in the 1930s than now
Congress lacks any such power
It does not matter.
Under the holding of Erie, why is it constitutional for federal courts hearing diversity cases to apply Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 regarding mandatory disclosure of certain facts, rather than state law?

It's authorized by the Rules Enabling Act
It's authorized by Article III of the U. S. Constitution
It is not constitutional
State law should be applied
Under the holding of Erie, why was it constitutional for federal courts to develop the "exclusionary rule" for criminal cases rather than relying on state criminal law?

That's an interesting question; I'll talk to my coursemates about it
It's unconstitutional
Rule 23 gives the power
Erie was a civil case
The Supreme Court remands to the Second Circuit. What must the court of appeals do on remand? Anything other than entering judgment for the railroad?
Nothing; it should enter judgment
It must remand to the trial court to determine PA law on the substantive issue
It must provide further interpretation of the Supreme Court's opinion
It must consider NY law