Skip to main content
Fifth Circuit· 1/23/1995

Exxon Corp. v. Burglin

Citations

  • 42 F.3d 948
  • 31 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1491
  • 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 1210
  • 1995 WL 3843

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that Fed. R. App. P. 38 allows the recovery of attorney’s fees as a sanction for the bringing of a frivolous appeal
  • adopting same reasoning used in Burlington to apply Rule 38 instead of Alaska statute
  • “If the [federal] Rule speaks to the point in dispute and is valid, it is controlling, and no regard need be paid to contrary state provisions.”
  • “Where the state rule reflects a substantive state policy not in conflict with the plain meaning of the federal rule, then the state rule is the rule of decision and should be applied under the terms of the Erie doctrine.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Garwood, Higginbotham, Davis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.