The question
Whether Delaware's requirement that a medical malpractice complaint be accompanied by an affidavit of merit applies to such a claim brought in federal court, or is displaced by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Berk v. Choy
What the Court decided
The Court held that Delaware's affidavit of merit law does not apply in federal court, reversing the Third Circuit's affirmance of the dismissal. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 answers the disputed question by requiring only a short and plain statement of the claim, not evidence of it, and a valid Federal Rule on point displaces contrary state law. Because Rule 8 and Delaware's law give different answers to whether the complaint could be dismissed for lacking an affidavit, the federal rule governs.
How the justices split
UnanimousThe Court's opinion
Barrett, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
When a valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure is on point, it displaces contrary state law even if that law would be substantive under Erie, so long as the Rule does not exceed statutory authorization or Congress's rulemaking power. Rule 8 requires only a short and plain statement of the claim and establishes with unmistakable clarity that evidence of the claim is not required, and Rule 12 permits merits dismissal only for failure to state a claim while barring consideration of matters outside the pleadings. Because Rule 8 and Delaware's affidavit law give different answers to whether Berk's complaint could be dismissed, the federal rule governs and the state law does not apply in federal court.
Concurring in the judgment
Jackson, writing alone
Jackson agreed with the outcome that Delaware's affidavit law does not apply in federal court but wrote separately, not joining the Court's reasoning. The syllabus identifies this only as an opinion concurring in the judgment and does not state its rationale.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court held that Delaware's affidavit of merit law does not apply in federal court.
Source: syllabus, Held
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires only a short and plain statement of the claim and does not require evidence of the claim at the outset of litigation.
Source: syllabus, Held
A valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure that is on point displaces contrary state law even if the state law would qualify as substantive under Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins.
Source: syllabus, Held
Barrett delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Jackson filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.
Source: syllabus, lineup