County of Orange v. United States District Court
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6210
9th Cir.2015Background
- This mandamus petition asks whether, in diversity, California law or federal law governs the validity of a pre-dispute jury trial waiver in a contract governed by California law.
- California law generally prohibits pre-dispute jury waivers unless expressly authorized by statute (Grafton Partners).
- Federal law permits such waivers if the rights are knowingly and voluntarily waived (Palmer v. Valdez).
- The district court struck the County's jury demand, invoking Erie to determine whether federal or California law applied.
- The contract contains a California choice-of-law clause and includes a broad jury-trial waiver.
- The court ultimately grants mandamus, holding California law governs the waiver's enforceability in diversity cases governed by California-contract law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which law governs the waiver's validity in diversity? | County: state law governs substantive rights; Erie requires state law be applied. | Tata: federal rule governs waiver validity in diversity cases. | Federal procedural law governs validity, but state law may apply when more protective; California rule prevails here. |
| Is the district court’s application of the federal knowing-and-voluntary standard correct? | County argues the federal standard is not controlling where California law is more protective. | Tata argues the federal standard governs waiver validity as a matter of federal procedure. | District court erred; California's Grafton rule governs in diversity; waiver unenforceable under California law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc., 518 U.S. 415 (1996) (Erie: state substantive and federal procedural law; outcome determinative consideration)
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) (federalism in diversity; state law rules apply absent federal rule)
- Simler v. Conner, 372 U.S. 221 (1963) (right to jury trial in federal courts governed by federal law)
- Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc., 356 U.S. 525 (1958) (federal courts in diversity apply federal law to determine jury-trial issues)
- Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2009) (knowing-and-voluntary waiver standard under federal law)
- Mondor v. U.S. District Court, 910 F.2d 585 (9th Cir. 1990) (mandamus appropriate where denial of jury trial is erroneous)