You have not been recognized as a subscriber to the AHR online. About 132 words from this article are provided below; about 540 words remain.
 
If you are a individual member of the American Historical Association, you may:
• login here if you have already registered for online access.
• Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time. AHA members can go to the AHA individual membership section to locate their member numbers.

If you are not a member of the American Historical Association, you can:
• Join the AHA and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the American Historical Review.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the American Historical Review (104.3-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the American Historical Review.

Instititutions can:
• Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.
| Book Review | The American Historical Review, 106.1 | The History Cooperative
106.1  
Journals link Search link Partners link Information link
February, 20001
 
The American Historical Review

Table of contents
List journal issues
Home
Get a printer-friendly version of this page
 
 


Book Review



Canada and the United States



Edward A. Purcell, Jr. Brandeis and the Progressive Constitution: Erie, the Judicial Power, and the Politics of the Federal Courts in Twentieth-Century America. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2000. P. x, 417. $37.50.

The Supreme Court's decision in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938) is overtly about an arcane rule concerning choice of law. Speaking through Justice Louis D. Brandeis, the Supreme Court held that in a case where federal jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship—that is, the parties are from different states—the federal judge is obliged to follow the law of the state in which the court sits rather than relying on the "general" law or any separate body of rules that might be followed in the federal courts. . . .


There are about 540 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.