Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
U.S. Case LawLegal Definition of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
304 U.S. 64 (1938), required federal courts to apply state law in diversity cases (i.e., cases in which the litigants are from different jurisdictions). Prior to Erie diversity cases were decided on the basis of what was held to be a kind of federal common law, which consisted of the “laws of the several states” plus federal courts'—not states'—interpretations of those laws (Swift v. Tyson, 41 U.S. 1 (1842)). Supporters of this earlier position believed that a federal common law was conducive to national development, while opponents claimed that it rode roughshod over states' rights. In an unprecedented ruling, Justice Louis D. Brandeis declared the earlier Supreme Court decision (Swift) unconstitutional, thus changing the course of diversity proceedings. Henceforth there would be no federal “common law” in diversity cases but only federal application of state laws.
Comments on Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
What made you want to look up Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins? Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible).
Test Your Vocabulary
Find the Cousins
-
- Which pair shares a common word ancestor?
Test your visual vocabulary with our 10-question challenge!
TAKE THE QUIZ
Test Your Knowledge - and learn some interesting things along the way.
TAKE THE QUIZ
Share Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
Resources for Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins