Federal courts and state law
Wells v. BNSF Railway
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court denied a petition (refused to hear it) from Jackson Wells and Judith Hemphill in a case against BNSF Railway.
- Who it affects
- The order gives Wells and Hemphill no Supreme Court answer on the question they raised.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
They asked whether federal courts must send an important state-law question about civil wrongs to the state’s highest court if it has left the issue open; the denial did not decide that question.
The petition concerned how federal and state courts should handle an important question when state law is unsettled.
Question presented
Whether the cooperative judicial federalism inaugurated by Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), and articulated by Lehman Brothers v. Schein, 416 U.S. 386 (1974), requires a federal court sitting in diversity to certify a dispositive question of tort law to the state’s highest court when the state court has expressly reserved that question and the question is of manifest importance to the state?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.