Law Commons^™

The Arrival Of The "Have-Nots" In International Arbitration, Catherine A. Rogers

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Arbitration Penumbra: Arbitration Law And The Rapidly Changing Landscape Of Dispute Resolution, Thomas J. Stipanowich

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Arbitration By Accident: The Consequence Of Unintentionally Meeting The Clear And Unmistakable Evidence Standard, Mark A. Mulchek

Journal of Dispute Resolution

A fundamental principle of arbitration law is that parties may only be compelled to submit an issue to arbitration if they agreed to do so. The question of when an arbitrator, instead of a district court, can decide the arbitrability of an issue has been taken up by the courts in recent years. In First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, the Supreme Court stated that an arbitrator may decide questions of arbitrability only when the parties have "clearly and unmistakably" agreed to defer such questions to an arbitrator. Since First Options, the lower courts have attempted to define when …

Only The Rich Can Afford A Remedy: The Unconscionable Enforcement Of Arbitration Provisions Against The Indigent, Ryan M. Turley

Journal of Dispute Resolution

In Overstreet v. Contigroup Cos., Inc.,2 the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that neither economic disadvantage nor undisclosed arbitration fees may form the basis for striking down an arbitration provision on the grounds of unconscionability.3 While the Supreme Court and the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) expressly authorize the use of the doctrine of unconscionability to invalidate arbitration provisions, courts are sharply divided on its proper application. 4 The difficult juxtaposition of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the FAA as a "liberal federal policy favoring arbitration" and the traditional application of unconscionability as a means of policing unfair contracts has …

Application Of Due Process To Arbitration Awards Of Punitive Damages - Where Is The State Action, The, Charles Smith

Journal of Dispute Resolution

This article will analyze why the position of the courts-no state action-is correct. Specifically, this article will take the position that the policy of finality traditionally found in arbitration law must trump any constitutional inquiries. This is because arbitration is ultimately based on the parties' agreement, which inevitably recites that the arbitrator's decision shall be final and, in any event, this finality is generally implied.

Vacatur Of Arbitration Awards: The Poor Loser Problem Or Loser Pays?, Stanley A. Leasure

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

In B. L. Harbert International, LLC. v. Hercules Steel Co., decided in February 2006, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals took the opportunity to express its "exasperation" with the growing tendency of losing parties in arbitration disputes to take a "never-say-die attitude" in the pursuit of vacatur of arbitral decisions "without any real legal basis for doing so" and its concern for the concomitant threat to the underlying purposes of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).

Applying the Harbert "any real legal basis" requirement raises several concerns that can be assuaged only by courts' commitment to focus on balancing following two …

Equitable Estoppel And The Compulsion Of Arbitration, Alexandra A. Hui

Vanderbilt Law Review

Freedom of contract is a longstanding principle deeply rooted in American jurisprudence, protected by the Contract Clause and by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.' Because of the legal system's high regard for freedom of contract, parties are free to negotiate virtually all issues, thus creating rights and limiting duties and obligations to one another.

In exercising this freedom to contract, parties often negotiate an arbitration clause. These clauses, also referred to as "predispute arbitration agreements," are contractual provisions agreed to in advance of any dispute that require a party to submit any and all future …

Misjudging: Implications For Dispute Resolution, Donna Shestowsky

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Faa And The Userra: Pro-Arbitration Policies Can Undermine Federal Protection Of Military Personnel, Laura Bettenhausen

Journal of Dispute Resolution

According to the United States Supreme Court, statutory claims may be the subject of an arbitration agreement contained in an individual employment contract. In Garrett v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit analyzed whether claims brought under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) are subject to arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The applicability of the FAA to employment contracts is an integral part of the analysis in this case. To determine whether arbitration is an appropriate forum for the plaintiff's claim, discussion of both the structure and …

Resisting Equal Footing: Did The Wisconsin Supreme Court Disguise An Assault On Arbitration, Peter Wilder

Journal of Dispute Resolution

It is well settled that state courts may apply state contract principles when determining if an arbitration clause is enforceable; however, states are prohibited from enforcing laws that treat arbitration agreements differently than other contracts. Placing arbitration agreements on an equal footing with other contracts results from judicial preference for arbitration. When a court overreaches to find an arbitration agreement to be procedurally and substantively unconscionable, the overreaching may stem from the court's erroneous preference for adjudication over arbitration. The issue becomes more apparent when the court had the option to enforce the agreement without the unconscionable provision, yet chose …

The Secret To Success: An Examination Of New York State Mediation Related Litigation, Andrew N. Weisberg

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Comment examines the difficulties in using alternative dispute resolution, specifically mediation, to settle disputes between parties. While mediation is meant to lighten the courts' caseload, it occasionally results in post-settlement issues concerning the mediated agreement, leaving the court to determine whether the agreement should be enforced. This Comment examines such enforcement issues, specifically how often enforcement issues arise and the typical grounds on which parties rely to vacate or modify mediated agreements. It discusses the research conducted on New York State cases decided between 1/1/2004 and 10/31/2006 and describes research conducted by Hamline University School of Law Professors James …