Berk v. Choy · ¶55

As with Cohen, respondents overstate the effect of Walker. There, we held that a federal court sitting in diversity must apply an Oklahoma law that deemed an action “commenced” upon service of the summons for purposes of the State's statute of limitations. 446 U. S., at 742. Rule 3, we explained, “governs the date from which various timing requirements of the Federal Rules begin to run, but does not affect state statutes of limitations.” Id., at 751. Here, by contrast, § 6853 and Rule 3 serve precisely the same function, in the same context: Both establish when a malpractice lawsuit is deemed initiated (i. e., fled and docketed) for purposes of determining “the date from which various timing requirements of the Federal Rules begin to run.” Ibid. That is precisely the kind of confict that bars the application of state law in federal court under our precedents.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.