Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Courts
You Be The Judge: Analyzing When The Federal Arbitration Act's Judicial Review Standards Apply In State Court, Max Birmingham
You Be The Judge: Analyzing When The Federal Arbitration Act's Judicial Review Standards Apply In State Court, Max Birmingham
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
This article addresses whether, when the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) governs an arbitration, the FAA’s judicial review standards apply in state court and preempt application of different state law judicial review standards. This argument proceeds as follows: Part I provides an introduction. Part II analyzes the procedural reform intent of the FAA and why the statute seeks to standardize the arbitration process. Part III reviews the judicial review of arbitration awards as promulgated in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. Part IV reviews the generations of FAA cases which have been held to be preempted by SCOTUS. Part V …
Reframing The Dilemma Of Contractually Expanded Judicial Review: Arbitral Appeal Vs. Vacatur , Eric Van Ginkel
Reframing The Dilemma Of Contractually Expanded Judicial Review: Arbitral Appeal Vs. Vacatur , Eric Van Ginkel
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") of 1925 was created to ensure enforceability of agreements to arbitrate. The FAA is the centerpiece of the federal arbitration policy as construed by the Supreme Court. Section 10(a) FAA enumerates grounds on which an arbitral award can be set aside. The central issue discussed herein is whether parties can agree by contract to allow one of the parties to initiate review of the arbitral award by a court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over those parties, or whether the court's powers are somehow limited to the grounds for vacatur enumerated in Section 10(a) FAA. …
Contracting Around Ruaa: Default Rules, Mandatory Rules, And Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards, Christopher R. Drahozal
Contracting Around Ruaa: Default Rules, Mandatory Rules, And Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards, Christopher R. Drahozal
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
By specifying that its provisions generally are default rules and listing particular exceptions, the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act (“RUAA”) provides much needed certainty and avoids unnecessary litigation, at least compared to the Federal Arbitration Act, which does not always identify which of its provisions are default rules. In one important respect, however, RUAA jettisons that valuable certainty. The RUAA drafters left open (or at least sought to leave open) the question whether parties can contract to expand the grounds for judicial review of arbitration awards beyond those set out in the statute. In other words, the drafters purported not to …
"Expanded" Judicial Review Revisited: Kyocera Overturns Lapine, Eric Van Ginkel
"Expanded" Judicial Review Revisited: Kyocera Overturns Lapine, Eric Van Ginkel
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
Just when you thought you could validly add a clause to your client's arbitration agreement providing that the losing party may take an appeal from the award to the district court having jurisdiction over the parties, think again. What was the law of the Ninth Circuit since December 1997, when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided LaPine Technology Corporation v. Kyocera Corporation ("LaPine I"), has just been reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc. In its decision, on a rehearing of what the court refers to as " …