Law Commons^™

Speaker, “Fighting For The Debtor’S Soul: Church Autonomy, Religious Arbitration And Bankruptcy’S Automatic Stay”, Michael Helfand

Michael A Helfand

No abstract provided.

Manifest Disregard And The Imperfect Procedural Justice Of Arbitration, Thomas V. Burch

Thomas V. Burch

Arbitration is an efficient dispute-resolution system that respects parties’ right to an accurate award. But because arbitration is designed to be efficient, accuracy is not guaranteed. This presents a challenge when courts are asked to confirm or vacate arbitrators’ decisions. Judges dislike approving inaccurate awards, especially in cases where parties have unequal bargaining power. Yet, judges also recognize arbitration’s limited-review principle. So they are forced to balance their desire for accuracy against arbitration’s efficiency policy. Efficiency typically wins at the expense of accurate outcomes.

This Article contends that courts place too much emphasis on the efficiency policy in mandatory arbitration. …

Contracting For State Intervention, W. Mark C. Weidemaier

W. Mark C. Weidemaier

Anatomy Of The First Public International Sports Arbitration And The Future Of Public Arbitration After Usada V. Floyd Landis, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

Mere weeks after American professional cyclist Floyd Landis seemingly won the 2006 Tour de France, the United States Anti-Doping Association (USADA), under the authority granted to it by the U.S. Congress, and through its enforcement of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), accused him of having committed doping violations during the race. Landis vehemently denied these allegations, and accused the French laboratory that had performed the testing of his post-race samples, the Laboratoire National du Depistage du Dopage (LNDD), of bias and misconduct in his case.

Under USADA rules, an American athlete accused of doping may request an arbitration hearing before …

The Other Avenues Of Hall Street And Prospects For Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

In Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) provided the exclusive grounds for judicial vacatur and modification of arbitral awards covered under the Act. In so ruling, the Court rejected the contention that the FAA’s requirement to enforce arbitration contracts as written includes private contracts that seek to expand the scope of judicial review beyond the grounds enumerated in the FAA. Despite holding that parties cannot expand a court’s power to review an arbitration award under the FAA, the Court alluded to the possibility of “other possible avenues” for …