Also known as: on point · directly on point · case in point
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A legal authority or precedent that directly addresses the precise issue under consideration.
CodeSpark served CloudSphere by certified mail under the Federal Rules after a data loss suit in diversity. CloudSphere moved to dismiss citing State A's personal delivery requirement. No federal rule squarely addressed service, so the court weighed state and federal interests because no directive was in point.
Alex sued Summit Builders after a scaffolding collapse and the parties disputed whether a statutory employee question went to the judge or jury. A valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly addressed the allocation. The court applied the federal rule because it was in point even though it differed from state practice.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Police questioned a suspect without warnings and the prosecution offered the resulting statements. Defense counsel cited Miranda as directly in point. The court suppressed the statements because the precedent squarely governed custodial interrogation.
Consumers challenged an arbitration agreement containing a class waiver under state unconscionability doctrine. AT&T invoked the Federal Arbitration Act. The court held the federal statute in point and enforced the clause despite the state rule.
A candidate challenged contribution caps as violating the First Amendment. Buckley supplied the controlling framework for expenditure and contribution distinctions. The court treated the precedent as in point and struck down the expenditure limits.
A grandmother faced eviction under a zoning rule limiting household composition. Moore addressed substantive due process protection for extended family living arrangements. The court found the precedent in point and invalidated the ordinance as applied.
A federal rule is on point when it directly regulates the precise procedural issue before the court. Once identified the rule governs even if it produces a different outcome than state practice. Erie balancing applies only when no such federal directive exists.
Supporting sources
The court weighs the respective interests of the state and the federal judicial system. It considers whether ignoring state law would encourage forum shopping and whether the issue is bound up with substantive policy or federal procedural values. The balance determines which rule applies.
Supporting sources
A rule is in point only when it squarely covers the disputed issue. Analogous authority may be persuasive but does not displace the need for direct application or interest balancing when characterization is unclear.
Supporting sources
…invitation to lower courts to rewrite the law of confessions, a significant heavy majority of the state and federal decisions in point have sought quite narrow interpretations.[^maj-17] Of the courts that have accepted the invitation, it is hard to know how many have felt compelled by their best guess as to this Court's…