Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
E615011
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins is a landmark 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ended the practice of federal general common law and required federal courts in diversity cases to apply state substantive law.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins canonical | 3 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6737225 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court, includesCase, Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins]
-
A.
Railway Express Agency v. New York
Railway Express Agency v. New York is a 1949 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld a New York City traffic regulation restricting advertising on vehicles against an Equal Protection Clause challenge.
-
B.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a key step in applying federal constitutional protections—particularly just compensation for takings—to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
-
D.
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. is a landmark 1928 New York Court of Appeals case, authored by Judge Benjamin Cardozo, that established the modern American doctrine of proximate cause and foreseeability in negligence law.
-
E.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. is a 1916 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal income tax and clarified the scope and constitutionality of the Sixteenth Amendment.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins Target entity description: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins is a landmark 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ended the practice of federal general common law and required federal courts in diversity cases to apply state substantive law.
-
A.
Railway Express Agency v. New York
Railway Express Agency v. New York is a 1949 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld a New York City traffic regulation restricting advertising on vehicles against an Equal Protection Clause challenge.
-
B.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a key step in applying federal constitutional protections—particularly just compensation for takings—to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
-
D.
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. is a landmark 1928 New York Court of Appeals case, authored by Judge Benjamin Cardozo, that established the modern American doctrine of proximate cause and foreseeability in negligence law.
-
E.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. is a 1916 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal income tax and clarified the scope and constitutionality of the Sixteenth Amendment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
civil procedure case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil procedure
ⓘ
conflict of laws ⓘ federal courts ⓘ |
| citation | 304 U.S. 64 ⓘ |
| citationParallel |
58 S. Ct. 817
ⓘ
82 L. Ed. 1188 ⓘ |
| constitutionalBasisDiscussed | Article III of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1938-04-25 ⓘ |
| dissentingJustice | Pierce Butler NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| effect |
ended the practice of federal general common law in diversity cases
ⓘ
increased importance of state supreme court decisions in federal diversity cases ⓘ required federal courts in diversity cases to apply state substantive law ⓘ |
| fullName | Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| geographicOriginOfDispute | Pennsylvania NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
Federal courts sitting in diversity must apply state substantive law.
ⓘ
The Rules of Decision Act requires application of state law as declared by the state’s highest court. NERFINISHED ⓘ There is no general federal common law. ⓘ |
| impact | redefined the relationship between federal and state courts in diversity cases ⓘ |
| injuryType | personal injury from train accident ⓘ |
| jurisdictionalBasis | diversity of citizenship ⓘ |
| lawSchoolCanon | commonly taught in first-year civil procedure courses in U.S. law schools ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
choice of law in diversity jurisdiction
ⓘ
federal general common law ⓘ interpretation of the Rules of Decision Act ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Benjamin N. Cardozo
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Charles Evans Hughes NERFINISHED ⓘ Harlan F. Stone NERFINISHED ⓘ Hugo L. Black NERFINISHED ⓘ Louis D. Brandeis NERFINISHED ⓘ Owen J. Roberts NERFINISHED ⓘ Stanley F. Reed NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Louis D. Brandeis NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| overruled | Swift v. Tyson NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| overruledCaseCitation | 41 U.S. (16 Pet.) 1 ⓘ |
| page | 64 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Erie Railroad Company NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precedentStatus | leading case on the Erie doctrine ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | Harry Tompkins NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| shortName | Erie NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Rules of Decision Act NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| topic | Erie doctrine NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| volume | 304 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1938 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins Description of subject: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins is a landmark 1938 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ended the practice of federal general common law and required federal courts in diversity cases to apply state substantive law.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court
→
includesCase
→
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
ⓘ