Erie doctrine essay

Then the federal court must make an “Erie prediction,” making an educated guess as to how the Texas Supreme Court might rule today. The court can look at lower Texas court opinions, the trends in other states, dissents, and law review articles.

In Erie Railroad , the issue was whether a federal court had to follow state tort law or could instead invent its own tort law. The Supreme Court held it was unconstitutional for federal courts to create federal general common law in cases where state common law would otherwise be used.

Believe it or not, prior to the Supreme Court’s 1938 opinion in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, federal courts were free to “invent” their own common law, known as “federal general common law.” This was because of an 1842 case called Swift v.

In its most basic form, the Erie doctrine concerns the choice of law in federal court in diversity cases. In its most basic form, it asks three questions: Question # 1: Vertical choice of law asks: federal law or state law?