Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
“The Ashley Special -TheTrain
That Changed the Common
Law”
Courtesy of the Steamtown
National Historic Site,
Scranton, Pen...
What “wrinkle” was discovered
by the “legal Young Turks”?
Given the changes in government during FDR’s
administration and ...
How do you
suppose this case,
Erie Railroad Co. v
Tompkins,
benefited interstate
and international
commerce?
On May 27, 2014 JudgeVanaskie reiterated his 1997 remarks as a prensenter at a
seminar,The Ashley Special -TheTrainThat Ch...
S
o
u
r
c
e
o
f
C
o
m
m
o
n
l
a
w
.
Federal - state relationship.
Define “state”.
1994 Edition: Federal
Civil Judicial
Procedure and Rules
Looking back:
What changes have
been made to
Section 34 of the
Ju...
The laws of the several states, except where theConstitution or treaties of the United
States or Acts of Congress otherwis...
On page 289 of
this University
Casebook Series
it implies in part:
That the original
handwritten version of
§34 of the Jud...
28 U.S.C. 610
As used in this chapter the
word “courts” includes the
courts of appeals and
district courts of the
United S...
So; What type of person altered §34
of the Judiciary Act of 1789?
Was it Senator Oliver Ellsworth’s or
someone else?
How w...
From Pennsylvania’s Statutes at Large
1782
Prevent the erecting any new and independent state within the limits of this co...
Follow-up article
THE (SCRANTON) TIMES-TRIBUNE - WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014
END OF PRESENTATION.
The Federal Judicary Act of 1789:  A Critique of recent Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins seminar
The Federal Judicary Act of 1789:  A Critique of recent Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins seminar
The Federal Judicary Act of 1789:  A Critique of recent Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins seminar
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The Federal Judicary Act of 1789: A Critique of recent Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins seminar

2,497 views

Published on

This presentation is a critique of Section 34 of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789; how the original was worded to apply to common law, how it was altered, and how it has been / is being used to erect a State within the State.

Links:
Slide 8 - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1652
Slide 12 - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/610
Slide 14 - http://www.palrb.us/statutesatlarge/17001799/1782/0/act/1000.pdf

Published in: Education
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

The Federal Judicary Act of 1789: A Critique of recent Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins seminar

  1. 1. “The Ashley Special -TheTrain That Changed the Common Law” Courtesy of the Steamtown National Historic Site, Scranton, Pennsylvania.
  2. 2. What “wrinkle” was discovered by the “legal Young Turks”? Given the changes in government during FDR’s administration and its “New Deal”; Why do you suppose Justice Story concluded as he did?
  3. 3. How do you suppose this case, Erie Railroad Co. v Tompkins, benefited interstate and international commerce?
  4. 4. On May 27, 2014 JudgeVanaskie reiterated his 1997 remarks as a prensenter at a seminar,The Ashley Special -TheTrainThat Changed the Common Law. The seminar was held at the Steamtown National Historic Site, Scranton, Pennsylvania.
  5. 5. S o u r c e o f C o m m o n l a w .
  6. 6. Federal - state relationship. Define “state”.
  7. 7. 1994 Edition: Federal Civil Judicial Procedure and Rules Looking back: What changes have been made to Section 34 of the JudiciaryAct since it was handwritten in 1789.
  8. 8. The laws of the several states, except where theConstitution 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.
  9. 9. 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)
  10. 10. 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.
  11. 11. 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?
  12. 12. 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”?
  13. 13. Follow-up article THE (SCRANTON) TIMES-TRIBUNE - WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014
  14. 14. END OF PRESENTATION.

×