Erieblogging: Day Six
Essay Question 4 from the 2012 CivPro Exam

Erieblogging: Day Seven

Yet another un- or underexplored question about Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins  (parallel posted on Prawfblawg.
Today's question counts only as underexplored, not unexplored (due to Abbe Gluck’s marvelous article): A federal court is interpreting a state statute. Is it obligated by Erie to do so using the state’s method of statutory interpretation? Shouldn’t the answer be based on whether the state supreme court would want the federal court to do so? But, short of certification, how can we know whether that’s true

Bonus question: A sister state court is interpreting a state’s statute. Is it obligated by the Full Faith and Credit Clause to do so using the state’s method of statutory interpretation?

Double bonus question: A state court is interpreting a federal statute. Is it constitutionally obligated (by the Supremacy Clause?) to do so using federal methods of statutory interpretation?


Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)