When a federal court is hearing a case under diversity jurisdiction, it must apply state substantive law and federal procedural law. This principle is rooted in the Erie Doctrine, stemming from Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins. Substantive law determines legal rights and liabilities, such as those found in contract or tort law, while procedural law governs the mechanisms for resolving disputes. The incorrect answers fail to align with the Erie Doctrine. For instance, 'Federal statutory law for substantive questions' misrepresents the doctrine by mistakenly suggesting federal statutory law governs substantive issues by default. Likewise, 'The federal circuit's jurisdictional law applicable to the case' inappropriately applies a regional federal interpretation, rather than adherence to state substantive law.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the Erie Doctrine?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the difference between substantive law and procedural law?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why might someone incorrectly believe that federal law applies in diversity cases?