Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- ADR Scholarship (2)
- Arbitrability (2)
- Arbitration (2)
- Act (1)
- Adhesion (1)
-
- Adhesive (1)
- Agreements (1)
- Arbitrate (1)
- Arbitration Act (1)
- Arbitration agreements (1)
- Arbitration clause (1)
- Arbitration provision (1)
- Arbitrator (1)
- Broker (1)
- Canons of construction (1)
- Coercion (1)
- Commerce (1)
- Common law (1)
- Common-law (1)
- Congressional purpose (1)
- Consumer (1)
- Contract law (1)
- Contracting (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Courts (1)
- Customer (1)
- Duress (1)
- Dynamism (1)
- Eclectic pragmatism (1)
- Federal Arbitration Act (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Rehnquist Court, Statutory Interpretation, Inertial Burdens, And A Misleading Version Of Democracy, Jeffrey W. Stempel
The Rehnquist Court, Statutory Interpretation, Inertial Burdens, And A Misleading Version Of Democracy, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
No one theory or school of thought consistently dominates judicial application of statutes, but the basic methodology employed by courts seems well-established if not always well-defined. Most mainstream judges and lawyers faced with a statutory construction task will look at (although with varying emphasis) the text of the statute, the legislative history of the provision, the context of the enactment, evident congressional purpose, and applicable agency interpretations, often employing the canons of construction for assistance. Although orthodox judicial thought suggests that the judge's role is confined to discerning textual meaning or directives of the enacting legislature, courts also often examine …
Reconsidering The Employment Contract Exclusion In Section 1 Of The Federal Arbitration Act: Correcting The Judiciary's Failure Of Statutory Vision, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Reconsidering The Employment Contract Exclusion In Section 1 Of The Federal Arbitration Act: Correcting The Judiciary's Failure Of Statutory Vision, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
The Federal Arbitration Act (the Act), seeks to eliminate centuries of perceived judicial hostility toward arbitration agreements. The Act made written arbitration agreements involving interstate commerce specifically enforceable. It also provided a procedural structure for enforcing awards, which were protected through deferential judicial review. The Act intended to have a wide reach, employing a broad definition of commerce that has presumably grown in breadth along with the expansion of judicial notions of commerce. Although courts applied the Act in tentative and cautious fashion until the 1960's, arbitration gained momentum during the 1970's and the 1980's. Despite growing judicial enthusiasm for …
A Better Approach To Arbitrability, Jeffrey W. Stempel
A Better Approach To Arbitrability, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
Historically, Anglo-American courts refused to enforce arbitration agreements, jealously guarding their dispute resolution monopoly. During the early twentieth century, merchants and attorneys began seeking legislation requiring courts to defer to arbitration. The United States Abitration Act took effect January 1, 1926 and has remained essentially unchanged. It was written with the implicit assumption that it would be invoked by commercial actors having relatively equal bargaining power and emotive appeal to a jury. The Act says nothing to direct the court's inquiry concerning the quality of either party's assent to the arbitration clause other than requiring a written arbitration agreement and …