On Appeals: When the Court Phones a Friend: Certification of Questions of State Law
Given the increased interest in certification, litigators of all stripes should understand the rules governing it.
September 21, 2022 at 05:00 AM
7 minute read
Got a thorny question of state law in your federal case? The federal court certainly has the power to decide it. Indeed, federal courts routinely decide questions of state law, doing their best to make an "Erie guess" as to the right result. But just because the federal court can decide the question doesn't mean it will. There's another option: certifying the question to the appropriate state supreme court.
Once rare and relatively unknown, the certification process has been gaining traction in recent years. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions (McKesson v. Doe, 141 S. Ct. 48, 49 (2020) (per curiam), and Carney v. Adams, 141 S. Ct. 493, 504 (2020) (Sotomayor, J. concurring)) discussing the importance of certification. And just two months ago, Justice Elena Kagan pondered during argument in U.S. v. Washington—a case involving a state law aimed at federal workers who got sick while cleaning up the Hanford nuclear site—whether certification to the Washington Supreme Court might be appropriate. Meanwhile, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified nearly four times as many questions between 2015 and 2019 (84) as it did between 1990 and 1994 (23).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudges Split Over Whether Indigent Prisoners Bringing Suit Must Each Pay Filing Fee
Devin Nunes, Former California GOP Congressman, Loses Move to Revive Defamation Suit
6 minute readPoop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
4 minute readIs 1st Circuit the New Center for Trump Policy Challenges?
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250