In addition to S.B. 222 discussed here, the 81st Texas Legislature is considering H.B. 1083. The bill, authored by Rep. Gary Elkins, states that “Except as provided by agreement of the parties, a court may not order mediation in an action that is subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. Sections 1-16).” Status: Referred to the Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence on 02/24/2009.

Continue reading...

We’ve blogged before, on numerous occasions, about McCarran-Ferguson Reverse Preemption of the Federal Arbitration Act. Specifically, we’ve blogged about the Kepka case out of Houston, whereby the Court held that Texas medical malpractice legislation, which holds that an agreement to arbitrate a med-mal case must be signed by both the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s attorney, was legislation to regulate the insurance industry, and

Continue reading...

On Thursday, the Fifth Circuit handed down an opinion in a complicated case (link is to .pdf of opinion) which implicates, in part, the Federal Arbitration Act, to the extent it codifies the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (we blogged on the New York Convention and its roots back in June). In any event, while Thursday’s case is not really about arbitration, an international arbitration is at

Continue reading...

This morning, the Texas Supreme Court made vague reference to the possibility that the Federal Arbitration Act can be reverse pre-empted by the McCarran-Ferguson Act. Since this is the sort of thing we find fascinating, I poked around a bit. As readers of this blog know, certain language (in 10-point boldface type no less) must be present in any arbitration agreement that would require a patient or prospective patient to arbitrate a medical liabi

Continue reading...