The U.S. Supreme Court term is in full swing. Class-wide arbitration agreements have been a hot topic in the courts recently and the trend is continuing with the high court this fall. ADR news to note:
Scheduled for November 9, 2010 Oral Argument
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 09-893: A class-wide arbitration case from the 9th Circuit asking the Court to consider whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts states from conditioning enforcement of an arbitration agreement on the availability of particular procedures when those procedures are not necessary to ensure that the parties to the arbitration agreement are able to vindicate their claims.
Certiorari denied on October 4, 2010
Louisiana Safety Association of Timbermen – Self Insurers Fund v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et. al, 09-945, (No. 06-30262, 5th Circuit, November 9, 2009, unpublished): The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether Chapter 2 of the FAA is an “Act of Congress” subject to the anti-preemption provision of the McCarran-Ferguson Act. The Fifth Circuit held the McCarran–Ferguson Act did not authorize state law to reverse-preempt the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards or its implementing legislation, vacated a district court’s order and remanded the case. The denial is not surprising as the U.S. Solicitor General recommended on August 26, 2010 (from Scotus Blog) that the high court deny certiorari and decline to review the issue because the circuits are not in conflict.
Zurich American Insurance Company et. al v. Pioneer Natural Resources USA, Inc., 09-1305, (No. 09-31031, 5th Circuit, December 17, 2009, unpublished): The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether, in a case removed under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, 9 U.S.C. § 205, an order denying a motion to compel arbitration and remanding to state court is appealable under the FAA’s express right of interlocutory appeal from such denials, 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(C), notwithstanding 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). The Fifth Circuit held that such a decision could not be appealed when issued simultaneously with a remand decision not subject to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d).
Disputing blogged about both the Zurich and AT&T cases in June here.