You are on page 1of 1

Erie: Initially determine whether the issue can be readily classified as substantive, then would apply state law,

or procedural law, then would apply federal law If no clear answer, then the analysis proceeds to determine whether either of the twin aims of Erie is undermined: the discouragement of forum-shopping and avoidance of inequitable administration of the laws.

Step 1:

Can the issue be readily classified as substantive

If Substantive law: State law applies as per Erie

(state) or procedural (federal)

If not substantial law, then go to step 2

If maybe substantive law, then go to step 3

Step 2: Does FRCP or FRE apply?

Step 3: Hybrid

No: Then use WALKER


analysis: superimpose state law with federal law 1. Is it broad enough to control? 2. Valid exercise of congressional authority 3. NO Direct Collision

Yes: Federal law applies FRCP: Use Hanna Analysis


STATUTE: Use Stewart Analysis 1. Is it broad enough to control? 2. Valid exercise of congressional authority 3. DIRECT COLLISION

Substantive + Procedural:
Use York Outcome determining test Federal courts need to apply state law in matters of form and modes of procedure when the outcome can be significantly different, we refer to state law

+
Byrd Balancing Test : The significance of competing federal and state policies must be compared and state laws cannot alter the essential character or function of a federal court. Gasperini: Breathes new life into the York outcome determining test and the Byrd Balancing Test