Menu
All articles tagged '"U.S. Supreme Court"'
70 articles found
U.S. Supreme Court Grants Cert to Stolt-Nielsen: Class Action Arbitration Case
By Victoria VanBuren - June 16, 2009
As posted in our Commercial and Industry Arbitration and Mediation Group on LinkedIn, yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 548 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2008). The issue to be decided is whether imposing class arbitration on parties whose arbitration clauses are silent on that issue is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act. You can find background about this important case followin
U.S. Supreme Court: The End of Software Patents?
By Victoria VanBuren - June 1, 2009
Arbitration of Discrimination Claims: First Post-Pyett Case
By Victoria VanBuren - May 21, 2009
As reported this week by the Workplace Prof Blog, a U.S. District Court in Colorado has issued a decision involving arbitration of statutory claims within the context of a collective bargaining agreement. The case is Mathews v. Denver Newspaper Agency, LLP, 2009 WL 1231776 (D. Colo. 2009). Professor Richard Bales’ analysis of the decision is here: First Post-Pyett Case. Previous Coverage: U.S. Supreme Court Enforces Agreement to Arbitrate D
U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Arbitration Non-signatories’ Rights
By Victoria VanBuren - May 12, 2009
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, No. 08–146, 2009 WL 1174853 (May 4, 2009). Justice Scalia delivered the majority opinion, joined by Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Alito. Justice Souter filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Stevens joined. The Court decided the following issues: Whether appellate courts have jurisdiction under Section 16(a) of the FAA to r
U.S. Supreme Court Decided Arthur Andersen Case Today
By Victoria VanBuren - May 4, 2009
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, No. 08-146. One of the issues resolved by the Court is whether a contract to arbitrate a dispute is enforceable by a nonsignatory party to the agreement. The text of the opinion is here. We will blog on this case after we read it.
14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett: Conflicts of Interest
By Victoria VanBuren - April 6, 2009
Last Friday, we wrote about the latest U.S. Supreme Court case related to arbitration. As we re-read the lengthy opinion, one of the issues that caught our attention was the composition of the parties (fully described here) and the potential for conflicts of interest. As Justice Stevens‘ dissenting opinion points out, the majority noted “the problem of entrusting a union with certain arbitration decisions given the potential conflict
U.S. Supreme Court Enforces Agreement to Arbitrate Discrimination Claims in 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett
By Victoria VanBuren - April 3, 2009
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided (5-4) 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett, No. 07-581, (U.S. Apr. 1, 2009). Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito. Justice Stevens filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Souter filed a dissenting opinion as well, joined by Justices Ginsburg and Breyer. Respondents are employed as night lobby watchmen and are members of the Service Employ
U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Vaden v. Discover Bank
By Victoria VanBuren - March 19, 2009
Last week we blogged about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Vaden V. Discover Bank, No. 07-773, (U.S. Mar. 9, 2009). Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, and Thomas. Chief Justice Roberts concurred in part and dissented in part and was joined by Stevens, Breyer, and Alito. Here is a summary of the case. Discover Bank sued cardholder Vaden in Maryland state court to recover past due charges ($10,6
U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Federal Courts’ Arbitration Jurisdiction
By Victoria VanBuren - March 10, 2009
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Vaden v. Discover Bank (No. 07-773) 556 U.S. __ (2009). Interpreting section 4 of the FAA, the Court held that the federal court had no jurisdiction to compel arbitration because the underlying dispute arose under state law and the whole controversy did not qualify for federal-court adjudication. Special thanks to our friend Ross Runkel for bringing this important case to our attention. Visit here profess
U.S. Supreme Court Issues Arbitrability Opinion
By Rob Hargrove - February 20, 2008
Today was a busy day at the U.S. Supreme Court; five opinions were handed down. Others have commented about them all. One of the opinions, however, discusses Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preemption of state administrative proceedings and as such is something we need to mention. The case, Preston vs. Ferrer (link is to .pdf file), involves a dispute between noted television jurist Judge Alex and an attorney who may or may not have b
Legal Research
Recent Posts
Search
Legal Research
© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy