Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

Courts Gone “Irrationally Biased” In Favor Of The Federal Arbitration Act?—Enforcing Arbitration Provisions In Standardized Applications And Marginalizing Consumer-Protection, Antidiscrimination, And States’ Contract Laws: A 1925–2014 Legal And Empirical Analysis, Willy E. Rice

William & Mary Business Law Review

Spanning nearly forty years, the Supreme Court has issued multiple decisions and stated categorically that “judicial hostility to arbitration” was the sole impetus behind Congress’s decision to enact the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925. In fact, before the FAA, systemic trade-specific problems and practices generated heated disputes and widespread litigation among merchants and trade organizations. Thus, to arrest those constituents’ concerns, Congress enacted the FAA. Briefly, under the FAA section 2, arbitration is mandatory if a contractual arbitration provision is valid and a controversy “arises out of the contract.” However, common-law rules of contract formation are equally clear: Standing alone, …

Go to article

Toward A Theory Of Precedent In Arbitration, W. Mark C. Weidemaier

William & Mary Law Review

Do arbitrators create precedent? The claim that they do not recurs throughout much of the arbitration literature. Instead, arbitration often is viewed as an ad hoc forum in which arbitrators do justice (at best) within the confines of particular cases. As an empirical matter, however, it is increasingly clear that, in some arbitration systems, arbitrators often cite to other arbitrators, claim to rely on past awards, and promote adjudicatory consistency as an important system norm. Much like courts, then, arbitrators can (but do not always) create precedent that guides future behavior and provides a language in which disputants, lawyers, and …

Go to article