Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Erie doctrine is a fundamental legal doctrine of civil procedure in the United States which mandates that a federal court called upon to resolve a dispute not directly implicating a federal question (most commonly when sitting in diversity jurisdiction, but also when applying supplemental jurisdiction to claims factually related to a federal question or in an adversary proceeding in ...
application of the Erie doctrine: Ellis v. United States: 356 U.S. 674 (1958) Due Process, in forma pauperis United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. 356 U.S. 677 (1958) The secrecy of Grand jury testimonies Kent v. Dulles: 357 U.S. 116 (1958) right to travel, power of Secretary of State: Societe Internationale v. Rogers: 357 U.S. 197 (1958)
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins: 304 U.S. 64 (1938) limiting general federal common law by requiring that state law apply except where federal law exists Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch: 304 U.S. 92 (1938) reaffirming existence of federal common law in other cases United States v. Carolene Products Co. 304 U.S. 144 (1938)
Other doctrines, such as the abstention doctrine and the Rooker–Feldman doctrine limit the power of lower federal courts to disturb rulings made by state courts. The Erie doctrine requires federal courts to apply substantive state law to claims arising from state law (which may be heard in federal courts under supplemental or diversity ...
Because the need for minimum contacts is a matter of personal jurisdiction (the power of the court to hear the claim with respect to a particular party) instead of subject matter jurisdiction (the power of the court to hear this kind of claim at all), a party can explicitly or implicitly waive their right to object to the court hearing the case.
The city of Erie in November received word from the U.S. Census Bureau that its challenge to the 2020 count had been accepted. Latest Census data shows Erie's population dropped to lowest level in ...
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that the United States does not have a general federal common law and that U.S. federal courts must apply state law, not federal law, to lawsuits between parties from different states that do not involve federal questions.
We’re asking for the community to partner with us and help put an end to the violence in our beloved city of Erie. Skip to main content. 24/7 Help. For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 ...