Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

At The Brink Of Free Agency: Creating The Foundation For The Messersmith-Mcnally Decision - 1968-1975, Edmund P. Edmonds Oct 2013

At The Brink Of Free Agency: Creating The Foundation For The Messersmith-Mcnally Decision - 1968-1975, Edmund P. Edmonds

Edmund P. Edmonds

"One of the most dramatic periods in baseball’s long history of labor relations occurred from 1968 through 1975. The Major League Baseball Players Association negotiated baseball’s first Basic Agreement in 1968 without the benefit of any leverage that could alter most of Organized Baseball’s long practices that controlled the players’ mobility and wages. In 1975, however, the union won an arbitration panel hearing that determined that pitchers Dave McNally and Andy Messersmith were free agents after playing one full season under the renewed option year of their contracts and filing a grievance under the newly adopted arbitration process. This stunning …


The Arbitration Clause As Super Contract, Richard Frankel Feb 2013

The Arbitration Clause As Super Contract, Richard Frankel

Richard Frankel

It is widely acknowledged that the purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act was to place arbitration clauses on equal footing with other contracts. Nonetheless, federal and state courts have turned arbitration clauses into “super contracts” by creating special interpretive rules for arbitration clauses that do not apply to other contracts. In doing so, they have relied extensively, and incorrectly, on the Supreme Court’s determination that the FAA embodies a federal policy favoring arbitration.

While many scholars have focused attention on the public policy rationales for and against arbitration, few have explored how arbitration clauses should be interpreted. This article fills …


Enjoining Politically Motivated Strikes In Federal Courts: The Jacksonville Bulk Terminals Case, Mark A. Ozzello Feb 2013

Enjoining Politically Motivated Strikes In Federal Courts: The Jacksonville Bulk Terminals Case, Mark A. Ozzello

Pepperdine Law Review

The United States Supreme Court, in Jacksonville Bulk Terminals, Inc. v. International Longshoremen's Association, acknowledged that a work stoppage entirely motivated by political goals constitutes a "labor dispute" within the Norris-La Guardia Act which is prohibited from injunctive relief by a federal court. In so ruling, the Supreme Court found the Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union and Buffalo Forge Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO exceptions, which allow an injunction to issue pending arbitration in situations where the dispute underlying the work stoppage is arbitrable, to be inapplicable to the no-strike clause in the collective-bargaining agreement scrutinized. …


The Unjustified Furor Over Securities Arbitration, Gilbert R. Serota Jan 2013

The Unjustified Furor Over Securities Arbitration, Gilbert R. Serota

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


From Lord Coke To Internet Privacy: The Past, Present, And Future Of The Law Of Electronic Contracting, Juliet M. Moringiello, William L. Reynolds Jan 2013

From Lord Coke To Internet Privacy: The Past, Present, And Future Of The Law Of Electronic Contracting, Juliet M. Moringiello, William L. Reynolds

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.


Religion's Footnote Four: Church Autonomy As Arbitration, Michael A. Helfand Dec 2012

Religion's Footnote Four: Church Autonomy As Arbitration, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

While the Supreme Court’s decision in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC has been hailed as an unequivocal victory for religious liberty, the Court’s holding in footnote four – that the ministerial exception is an affirmative defense and not a jurisdictional bar – undermines decades of conventional thinking about the relationship between church and state. For some time, a wide range of scholars had conceptualized the relationship between religious institutions and civil courts as “jurisdictional” – that is, scholars converged on the view that the religion clauses deprived courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over religious claims. In turn, courts could not adjudicate religious disputes …