Talk:Erie doctrine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Good start 2 Not quite right 3 another change? 4 Contradiction in first paragraph?

[edit] Good start

I hope I didn't change the meaning of anything important in my copyedits. Keep up the good work. - Taxman 21:30, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not quite right

I'm studying for my own Civ Pro exam and so don't have time to update the page myself, but this version of the Hanna and Byrd-Erie approaches are far more scantily explained than in other sources. For example, there's not a decent discussion of the difference between the Guided and Unguided Erie approach under Hanna.

[edit] another change?

gasperini is not the most recent. SIMTEK is 2001 case

[edit] Contradiction in first paragraph?

The first paragraph seems to be self-contradictory. It starts by stating: "It is important to note that the Erie doctrine does not apply to cases involving federal statutory law, but only those cases that are in federal court because of diversity jurisdiction." Fair enough, but the same paragraph closes with the following statement: "An 'Erie' problem does not necessarily have to involve a diversity case, although the landmark cases were all diversity cases."