The Rules of Decision Act requires that federal courts apply state law in their decisions arising out of diversity jurisdiction, except when in conflict with federal law.
This act came from Section 34 of the Judiciary Act of 1789. It is now codified, in slightly different form, in 28 U.S.C. ยง 1652.
It states that:
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.
Its interpretation, especially the meaning of "the laws of the several states," was central to the issue in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins.
This interpretation has been called into question by Professor Wilfrid J. Ritz. At the time of the drafting of the Rules of Decision Act, modern reporting standards of state opinions did not exist. Reporting of these decisions was not regular until the nineteenth century. Therefore, at the time the Rules of Decision Act was written, there would have been no manner by which federal courts could have ascertained the common law of the states.
Rather, Professor Ritz opined that "Section 34 is a direction to the national courts to apply American law, as distinguished from English law. American law is to be found in the 'laws of the several states' viewed as a group of eleven states in 1789, and not viewed separately and individually. It is not a direction to apply the law of a particular state, for if it had been so intended, the section would have referred to the 'laws of the respective states.'" Wilfrid Ritz, Rewriting the History of the Judiciary Act of 1789 at 51 (Wythe Holt & Lewis H. LaRue eds., 1990)
Famous quotes containing the words rules of, rules, decision and/or act:
“Those rules of old discovered, not devised,
Are Nature sill, but Nature methodized;
Nature, like liberty, is but restrained
By the same laws which first herself ordained.”
—Alexander Pope (1688–1744)
“Rules and particular inferences alike are justified by being brought into agreement with each other. A rule is amended if it yields an inference we are unwilling to accept; an inference is rejected if it violates a rule we are unwilling to amend. The process of justification is the delicate one of making mutual adjustments between rules and accepted inferences; and in the agreement achieved lies the only justification needed for either.”
—Nelson Goodman (b. 1906)
“Every decision is liberating, even if it leads to disaster. Otherwise, why do so many people walk upright and with open eyes into their misfortune?”
—Elias Canetti (b. 1905)
“You should try to understand every thing you see and hear; to act and judge for yourselves; to remember you each have a soul of your own to account for; M a mind of your own to improve. When you once get these ideas fixed, and learn to act upon them, no man or set of men, no laws, customs, or combinations of them can seriously oppress you.”
—Jane Grey Swisshelm (1815–1884)