Menu
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Railway Labor Act Pre-Arbitration Conference Requirement
By Victoria VanBuren - December 22, 2009
This month, the United States Supreme Court handed down Union Pacific v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 558 U.S. ___(Dec. 8, 2009). Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. The Railway Labor Act (RLA) as amended, provides for arbitration of “minor disputes” of railroad employees before a panels at the National Railroad Adjustment Board (NRAB or Board). These panels are composed of two representatives of labo
U.S. Supreme Court Decides Railway Labor Act Arbitration Case
By Victoria VanBuren - December 10, 2009
As we were ready to wrap-up the year, the U.S. Supreme Court decides yet another arbitration case. In Union Pacific v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 558 U.S. ___(Dec. 8, 2009), the issue before the Court was whether pre-arbitration conference was a jurisdictional requirement. We will post a summary of the case after we read it and it will be added to our 2009 Year-End post as well.
2009 Arbitration Case Law: U.S. Supreme Court
By Victoria VanBuren - December 8, 2009
Welcome to Disputing‘s 2009 Year-End Highlights. During this year, the U.S. Supreme Court decided several cases related to arbitration: On March 9, the Court decided Vaden v. Discover Bank. The issues were (1) whether a district court, if asked to compel arbitration, should “look through” the petition and grant the relief if the court would have federal-question jurisdiction of the controversy and (2) whether a district court should exercis
Texas Supreme Court Hears Case on Standards of Judicial Review for Arbitration Awards After Hall Street
By Victoria VanBuren - October 8, 2009
As reported by the Texas Supreme Court Blog (thanks for the cite!) the Texas Supreme Court heard arguments today on the case NAFTA Traders, Inc. v. Margaret A. Quinn; from Dallas County; 5th district (05?07?00340?CV, 257 SW3d 795, 06?17?08). NAFTA Traders appeals the confirmation of an arbitral award in favor of Margaret Quinn in a sexual discrimination case under the Texas General Arbitration Act (TAA). The Dallas Court of Appeals relying on the
Michigan Journal of International Law Article on Class Action Arbitration
By Victoria VanBuren - September 23, 2009
Professor S.I. Strong, Senior Fellow at the University of Missouri’s Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution wrote an excellent article about the international implications of class arbitration. The article is entitled “The Sounds of Silence: Are U.S. Arbitrators Creating Internationally Enforceable Awards When Ordering Class Arbitration in Cases of Contractual Silence or Ambiguity?” and appears at 30 Michigan Journal of Inte
GUEST-POST PART IVB | Class and Consolidated Arbitration Under the Federal Arbitration Act: What Issues Will the United States Supreme Court Confront in Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. V. AnimalFeeds Int’l Co.?
By Victoria VanBuren - September 21, 2009
Part IVB: How will the Court Rule on the Merits? By Philip J. Loree Jr. I. Introduction In Part IVA (here) we considered whether the question in Stolt-Nielsen was one for the court or the arbitrators to decide, and predicted that at least five Justices of the United States Supreme Court will hold that the court must decide it. If we are correct, then the Supreme Court will consider on a de novo basis whether the arbitration panel had the authorit
GUEST-POST PART IVA | Class and Consolidated Arbitration Under the Federal Arbitration Act: What Issues Will the United States Supreme Court Confront in Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. V. AnimalFeeds Int’l Co.?
By Victoria VanBuren - September 1, 2009
Part IVA: Who Decides? By Philip J. Loree Jr. I. Introduction In Part III (here) we examined the background of Stolt-Nielsen and identified four issues that the United States Supreme Court will likely confront when it decides the case. In this part IVA we consider the first issue: Who decides whether class arbitration can be imposed on the parties when their arbitration agreements are silent on that point? Put differently, is the question one of
GUEST-POST PART III | Class and Consolidated Arbitration Under the Federal Arbitration Act: What Issues Will the United States Supreme Court Confront in Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. V. AnimalFeeds Int’l Co.?
By Victoria VanBuren - August 17, 2009
Part III: Background and Procedural History of the Stolt-Nielsen Case By Philip J. Loree Jr. Introduction Back when the buzz about Stolt-Nielsen focused on how the court breathed new life into the “manifest disregard of the law” standard, the facts of the case were not nearly as important as its discussion of the law. Ordinarily, though, the practice of law is the practice of facts, and as respects the question whether the Second Circuit’s holdin
Professor Alan Scott Rau Comments on Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Co.
By Victoria VanBuren - August 10, 2009
Professor Alan Scott Rau, from The University of Texas School of Law, has made the following comments regarding our recent posts on Stolt-Nielsen (see posts Part I, Part II, and Part III). I ‘m afraid I just can’t understand all this talk about “silence,” and I could use some help here. Contracts very often expressly address a problem—in which case courts have the task of “interpreting” just what they said. But often there will be no express prov
GUEST-POST PART II | Class and Consolidated Arbitration Under the Federal Arbitration Act: What Issues Will the United States Supreme Court Confront in Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. V. AnimalFeeds Int’l Co.?
By Victoria VanBuren - August 10, 2009
Part II: The Legal Landscape: Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle By Philip J. Loree Jr. Introduction As discussed in Part I, Stolt-Nielsen is a do-over of sorts. Back in 2003 the United States Supreme Court set out to decide in Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle whether imposing class arbitration on parties whose agreement is silent on that point is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act. But that never happened because it turned out the
Legal Research
Recent Posts
Search
Legal Research
© 2026, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy