Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins
Significance, The Court Changes Course, A "radical Change", Impact
Petitioner
Erie Railroad Company
Respondent
Tompkins
Petitioner's Claim
That state law, rather than federal court decisions, should determine whether the railroad was liable for injuries Tompkins suffered when walking along the railroad's right-of-way.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Theodore Kiendl
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Fred H. Rees
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, Louis D. Brandeis (writing for the Court), Charles Evans Hughes, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan Fiske Stone, Stanley Forman Reed
Justices Dissenting
Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds (Benjamin N. Cardozo did not participate)
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
25 April 1938
Decision
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the petitioner's claim and reversed the circuit court of appeal's validation of the trial jury's award of damages.
Related Cases
- Swift v. Tyson, 41 U.S. 1 (1842).
- Southern Pacific Co. v Jensen, 244 U.S. 205 (1917).
- Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co., 337 U.S. 530 (1949).
- Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460 (1965).
Further Readings
- Warren, Charles. "New Light on the History of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789," Harvard Law Review, Vol. 37, no. 49, 1923.
Additional topics
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. - Public Welfare Versus Private Ownership, Court Rules For "a Changing World", Further Readings
- De Jonge v. Oregon - Significance, Court Finds Freedom Of Assembly Protected From State Infringement
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins - Significance
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins - The Court Changes Course
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins - A "radical Change"
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1918 to 1940