Menu
All articles tagged '"Supreme Court"'
379 articles found
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
GUEST-POST PART I | 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 6, 2009
Part I: Introduction By Philip J. Loree Jr. Introduction The Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum is delighted to guest post once again on Karl Bayer’s and Victoria VanBuren’s wonderful ADR blog, Disputing. Because Victoria and I have both written fairly extensively about Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel, Inc, 128 S. Ct. 1396 (2008), and about two of the most frequently cited cases construing Hall Street’s dictum on manifest disregard of the l
Texas Supreme Court Finds that Court Abused Its Discretion by Allowing Pre-Arbitration Discovery
By Victoria VanBuren - July 21, 2009
The Supreme Court of Texas held that a court abused its discretion by permitting discovery instead of deciding a motion to compel arbitration. In re Houston Pipe Line Co., __S.W.3d __ (Texas 2009) (No. 08-0800) involves a gas purchase agreement between Houston Pipe Line Company, L.P. and O’Connor & Hewitt, Ltd. The agreement was based on the Houston Ship Channel Price Index (the “Index”) and contained the following arbitrati
Professor Alan Scott Rau Comments on In re Morgan Stanley
By Victoria VanBuren - July 15, 2009
Professor Alan Scott Rau has forwarded us the following comments relating to our post of yesterday, in which we summarized the recent Texas Supreme Court case of In re Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., __ S.W.3d __ (Texas 2009) (No. 07-0665). The Texas Supreme Court gets it absolutely right [and totally without regard to the fact that they quote me.] How could it be otherwise? Compare Justice Hecht’s dissent: “A raving lunatic in a stra
Texas Supreme Court Holds that the Court, not the Arbitrator Should Decide the Issue of Capacity to Contract
By Victoria VanBuren - July 14, 2009
The Texas Supreme Court held that a trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to submit to the arbitrator the question of whether a party to an arbitration agreement lacks the mental capacity to assent. Justice Medina delivered the opinion of the court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson and Justices Wainwright, Green, Johnson, and Willett joined. Justice Brister filed a concurring opinion, Justice Willett filed a concurring opinion, Ju
Law Review Article: “Disappearing Juries and Jury Verdicts”
By Victoria VanBuren - July 13, 2009
To follow up on our post of last week. We are pleased to recommend another excellent law review article, “Disappearing Juries and Jury Verdicts,” 39 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 289, written by the Honorable Sam Sparks, U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Texas and DLA Piper attorney George B. Butts. The article traces the history of jury trials, presents statistics reflecting the decline in the number of cases tried, and discusses F
Arbitration of Discrimination Claims After 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett
By Victoria VanBuren - July 8, 2009
On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the landmark case 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett (find our case summary here and additional comments here). Then, in May, a U.S. District Court in Colorado decided the first case post-Pyett (blogged here). Recently, we came across yet another Pyett progeny. This time, it was the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York‘s turn in Shipkevich v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp. & Aramark, 2
U.S. Supreme Court Vacates Sixth Circuit Decision that Nonsignatories May not Enforce Arbitration Agreement
By Victoria VanBuren - July 7, 2009
Looks like the U.S. Supreme Court can’t have enough of arbitration this term. As posted at the Adjunct Law Prof, the Court vacated and remanded Kimberlin v Renasant Bank (Dkt No 08-816). The issue decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit was whether non-parties to an arbitration agreement can invoke Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act and compel arbitration. The U.S. Supreme Court decided this issue recently in Arthur
Texas Supreme Court Rules on Arbitration of Tort Claims in Employment Contract
By Victoria VanBuren - July 6, 2009
The Supreme Court of Texas held that a post-injury arbitration acknowledgment agreement is valid and compelled arbitration of tort claims within the context of an employment contract. In In re Macy’s Texas, Inc., __ S.W.3d __ (Texas 2009) (No. 08-0584), Erica Tomsic was an employee at department store Macy’s. Tomsic claims to have injured her back while working at the store in April 2007. On May 9 2007, Tomsic signed an “Arbitra
Legal Research
Recent Posts
Search
Legal Research
© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy