Swift v. Tyson
Significance, The Need For A Uniform System Of Commerce, Impact
George W. Tyson
In a federal case based on diversity jurisdiction, the common law of the locus state should govern the tender of a negotiable instrument, not common law developed by a federal court.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Justices for the Court
Henry Baldwin, John Catron, Peter Vivian Daniel, John McKinley, John McLean, Joseph Story (writing for the Court), Roger Brooke Taney, Smith Thompson, James Moore Wayne
Date of Decision
In a federal case based on diversity jurisdiction, a federal court has the power to make its own decisions, in the absence of a controlling state statute.
- Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co., 276 U.S. 518 (1928).
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938).
- Johnson, John W., ed. Historic U.S. Court Cases, 1690-1990: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing, 1992.
- Rehnquist, William H.,The Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is. New York: Morrow, 1987.
- West's Encyclopedia of American Law. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 1998.
- Swift v. Tyson
- Strauder v. West Virginia - "a Brand Upon Them", African Americans And The Jury System, Further Readings
- Swift v. Tyson - Significance
- Swift v. Tyson - The Need For A Uniform System Of Commerce
- Swift v. Tyson - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias