Civil Procedure

Front 1

Erie - 2 Issues:

Back 1

1) Preemption issue

2) True Erie Issue - "Twin Aimes"

Front 2

Preemption issue:

Back 2

-A Federal Rule of Civil Procedure preempts a staterule if that Rule is (1) valid and (2) indisputably conflicts with the state rule.

Front 3

Validity of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Back 3

o We assume that all of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are valid procedural rules within the constitutional power of Congress. Congress has constitutional power to create the lower federal courts, and this power joined with its Necessary and Proper power, authorizes that body to enact operating or procedural rules for the courts it creates. Instead of directly enacting the Rules, Congress delegated the initial authority to promulgate Rules to the Supreme Court in the Rules Enabling Act. Proposed Rules or amendments go through an extensive process of review by both the Supreme Court and by Congress before they come into effect. This process ensures that the Rules are, in fact, rules of procedure. Furthering that end, the Rules Enabling Act requires that proposed Rules not abridge or modify substantive rights.

Front 4

True Erie Issue:

Back 4

- A state law must be applied in a federal diversity case if application of a conflicting federal judge-made rule would either

1. cause a party to forum shop between federal and state court or

2. cause the party involuntarily drawn into federal court the inequitable administration of the laws.

- If one cannot definitely find forum shopping or inequitable administration of the laws, a federal law that relates to an essential characteristic of the federal courts can outweigh the interests requiring application of the state law. (“twin-aims test” from Hanna v. Plumer)

Front 5

Byrd

Back 5

- the Court provided a balancing approach that allows application of thefederal common law when it affects the judge/jury relationship protected by theSeventh Amendment and when there is no good reason to apply the statelaw.

Front 6

Walker v. Armco Steel Co.

Back 6

Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proceduredoes not toll a state statute of limitations or preempt state tolling rules. Itis not in direct conflict with a state procedural law.

Front 7

Shady Grove

Back 7

- held that a Federal Rule that is procedural on its face is generally presumed valid, largely because of the complicated process by which the Rules come into existence. After approval by the Advisory Committee, the Judicial Conference and the Supreme Court, Congress has the opportunity to prevent any proposed Rule from becoming effective by enacting legislation to that effect. It’s difficult to conclude that both the Court and Congress failed to notice that a Rule exceeds either the constitutional power of Congress to make rules for the federal courts it creates or the delegation of this authority to the Court in the Rules Enabling Act.

Front 8

Rule Preemption problem

Back 8

1) Validity of Rule 2)The next question a court will ask, therefore, when faced with a Rule Preemption problem, is whether state law inescapably conflicts with a valid Federal Rule. If not, a court should allow the two to peacefully co-exist; if they do inescapably conflict, however, the Federal Rule will pre-empt the state law. If this preemption occurs, it does not matter whether application of the Federal Rule violates the Twin Aims test.