🤤
Civil Procedure • Erie Doctrine
CIVPRO#034
Legal Definition
To determine whether a law is substantive or procedural, the court will ask the following:
(1) If there is a federal rule on point, do the state and federal rules on the issue conflict? If NO, apply the federal rule, If YES, move on...
(2) Is the use of one or the other outcome determinative? If YES, the rule is substantive and you apply the state rule. If NO, move on...
(3) Would use of the federal rule violate significant federalism or state sovereignty concerns? If YES, apply the state rule. If NO, move on...
(4) Would failing to follow state law encourage forum shopping in federal court? If YES, apply the state rule. If NO, apply the federal rule.
(1) If there is a federal rule on point, do the state and federal rules on the issue conflict? If NO, apply the federal rule, If YES, move on...
(2) Is the use of one or the other outcome determinative? If YES, the rule is substantive and you apply the state rule. If NO, move on...
(3) Would use of the federal rule violate significant federalism or state sovereignty concerns? If YES, apply the state rule. If NO, move on...
(4) Would failing to follow state law encourage forum shopping in federal court? If YES, apply the state rule. If NO, apply the federal rule.
Plain English Explanation
Under the Erie Doctrine, courts follow a step-by-step process to determine whether a law is substantive or procedural when state law claims are involved in federal court:
(1) The court first checks if there is a federal rule on point. If the state and federal rules do not conflict, the court applies the federal rule. If they do conflict, the court moves to the next step.
(2) The court then asks if applying one rule or the other is outcome determinative. If choosing one rule would significantly affect the outcome of the case, the law is considered substantive, and the state rule applies. If not, the analysis continues.
(3) Next, the court considers whether using the federal rule would violate significant federalism or state sovereignty concerns. If it would, the court applies the state rule. If not, the analysis moves forward.
(4) Finally, the court asks if failing to follow state law would encourage forum shopping—meaning people would choose federal court just to get a different legal result. If yes, the court applies the state rule. If not, the federal rule applies.
(1) The court first checks if there is a federal rule on point. If the state and federal rules do not conflict, the court applies the federal rule. If they do conflict, the court moves to the next step.
(2) The court then asks if applying one rule or the other is outcome determinative. If choosing one rule would significantly affect the outcome of the case, the law is considered substantive, and the state rule applies. If not, the analysis continues.
(3) Next, the court considers whether using the federal rule would violate significant federalism or state sovereignty concerns. If it would, the court applies the state rule. If not, the analysis moves forward.
(4) Finally, the court asks if failing to follow state law would encourage forum shopping—meaning people would choose federal court just to get a different legal result. If yes, the court applies the state rule. If not, the federal rule applies.
