A Short

History of

the Erie

Railroad Co.

“The Ashley Special - The Train That Changed the

Common Law”

Courtesy of the Steamtown National

Historic Site, Scranton, Pennsylvania.

What would take for Tompkins to

win in a Pennsylvania court?

How did Tompkins’ lawyers

proceed?

Why did they choose the option

they chose?

What “wrinkle” was discovered by the “legal Young Turks”?

How was the Federal Judiciary Act

of 1789 interpreted as it pertained

to “Section 34” of the Act? By

whom was it interpreted?

Given the changes in government during FDR’s administration and its “New Deal”; Why do you

suppose Justice Story concluded as he did?

What was the rule for common law at the time of the Tompkins’ case? How was common law defined?

Why the change in venue?

How do you suppose this case,

Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins,

benefited interstate and international

commerce?

On May 27, 2014 Judge Vanaskie reiterated his 1997 remarks as a prensenter at a seminar, The Ashley Special - The Train That Changed

the Common Law.

The seminar was held at the Steamtown National Historic Site, Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Section

34.Source of Common law.

Federal - state relationship.

Define “state”.

What was the Court’s decision?

How has the Tompkins’ case affected court

decisiions since its Supreme Court ruling on April 25, 1938?

1994 Edition: Federal Civil Judicial

Procedure and Rules

Looking back:

What changes have been made to

Section 34 of the Judiciary Act

since it was handwritten in

1789.

The laws of the several states, except where the Constitution or treaties of the United States or

Acts

of Congress otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in civil actions in the courts of the United States, in cases where they apply. Curre

nt

.

On page 289 of this University

Casebook Series it implies in part:

That the original

handwritten version of

§34 of the Judicary

Act of 1789 was, in

1789, altered.

(Next slide)

Page 289

HOWEVER . .

.

28 U.S.C. 610

As used in this chapter the word “courts” includes the courts of appeals and district courts of the United States, the United States District Court for the District of the Canal Zone, the District Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, the United States Court of Federal Claims, and the Court of International Trade.

So; What type of person altered §34 of the Judiciary Act of 1789?

Was it Senator Oliver Ellsworth’s or someone else?

How would that individual have been described in 18th Century

terminology?

From Pennsylvania’s Statutes at Large 1782

Prevent the erecting any new and independent state within the limits of this commonwealth

“SECT. IV” identifies the type of

“persons” members of the 1782

Pennsylvania Assembly had concern.

What was the goal of these “ill

disposed persons”?

How many years elapsed between the

signing of the Declaration of

Independence in 1776, the enacting of

this 1782 Statute in Pennsylvania, and

the insertion of Art. 4 § 3 in the United

States Constitution?

What type of person altered Senator

Oliver Ellsworth’s wording of § 34 of the

Judiciary Act of 1789?

What is the penalty for “ill disposed

persons”?

Follow-up article

THE (SCRANTON) TIMES-TRIBUNE - WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014

END OF PRESENTATION.