Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 MAY 2009

Supreme Court Docket Report - May 4, 2009 - October Term

Mayer Brown
Mayer Brown
Contributor
Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown is a leading international law firm positioned to represent the world’s major...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mayer Brown

Under the well-known rule of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), federal courts exercising diversity jurisdiction apply state substantive law and federal procedural law. As the Supreme Court has noted in subsequent cases, distinguishing between substance and procedure can be challenging.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Originally published May 4, 2009

Keywords: Erie Doctrine, diversity jurisdiction, class actions, Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, federal jurisdiction, Supreme Court

Today the Supreme Court granted certiorari in one case of interest to the business community:

Erie Doctrine—Class Actions

Under the well-known rule of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), federal courts exercising diversity jurisdiction apply state substantive law and federal procedural law.  As the Supreme Court has noted in subsequent cases, distinguishing between substance and procedure can be challenging.  In Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. (No. 08-1008), in which certiorari was granted today, the Supreme Court will again consider which laws apply to the adjudication of state-law claims in federal court.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from