Law Commons^™

Structural Barriers To Inclusion In Arbitrator Pools, Nicole G. Iannarone

Washington Law Review

Critics increasingly challenge mandatory arbitration because the pools from which decisionmakers are selected are neither diverse nor inclusive. Evaluating diversity and inclusion in arbitrator pools is difficult due to the black box nature of mandatory arbitration. This Article evaluates inclusion in arbitrator pools through a case study on securities arbitration. The Article relies upon the relatively greater transparency of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) forum. It begins by describing the unique role that small claims securities arbitration plays in maintaining investor trust and confidence in the securities markets before describing why ensuring that the FINRA arbitrator pool is both …

Standards Of Review In Texas, W. Wendell Hall, Ryan G. Anderson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Venezuela Undermines Gold Miner Crystallex's Attempts To Recover On Its Icsid Award, Sam Wesson

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Improving Employer Accountability In A World Of Private Dispute Resolution, Hope Brinn

Michigan Law Review

Private litigation is the primary enforcement mechanism for employment discrimination laws like Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and many related state statutes. But the expansion of extrajudicial dispute resolution—including both arbitration and prelitigation settlement agreements—has compromised this means of enforcement. This Note argues that state-enacted qui tam laws can revitalize the enforcement capacity of private litigation and provides a roadmap for enacting such legislation.

The Uncertain Status Of The Manifest Disregard Standard One Decade After Hall Street, Stuart M. Boyarsky

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) enables parties to obtain quick and final resolution to disputes without incurring the costs, delays, and occasional publicity of litigation. Indeed, section 10 of the FAA enumerates four specific grounds on which courts may vacate arbitral awards: corruption, fraud, impartiality, and misconduct or incompetence. Yet over the past 60 years, a debate has raged over the existence of an additional ground: the arbitrator’s manifest disregard of the law.

The Supreme Court first enounced this standard in dicta in its 1953 decision in Wilko v. Swan. Over next four decades, every federal circuit court slowly …

Our Courts, Ourselves: How The Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement Is Re-Shaping Our Legal System, Deborah R. Hensler

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Twenty-seven years ago, Professor Frank Sander urged American lawyers and judges to re-imagine the civil courts as a collection of dispute resolution procedures tailored to fit the variety of disputes that parties bring to the justice system. Professor Sander’s vision of the justice system encompassed traditional litigation leading to trial, but his speech at the 1976 Roscoe Pound Conference drew attention to alternatives to traditional dispute resolution that he argued would better serve disputants and society than traditional adversarial processes.

Today, interest in dispute resolution is high. This interest cuts across many domains, ranging from the family, to the schoolyard, …

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: The Effect Of Future Awards On International Terrorism, Casey J. College

Arbitration Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Helmsley Case: An Illustration Of The Confused State Of The Law Surrounding The Manifest Disregard Of Law Doctrine As Applied To Arbitration, David Graff

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Filling The Gap Between Morality And Jurisprudence: The Use Of Binding Arbitration To Resolve Claims Of Restitution Regarding Nazi-Stolen Art , Rebecca Keim

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Recognizing the gaps in existing legislation, this article will argue that disputes arising between claimants and museums regarding the repatriation of Nazi-looted artwork should be decided by binding arbitration rather than litigation. To facilitate such arbitration, international law should support the creation of an arbitration commission, which would provide the most efficient and consistent way to resolve claims. Moreover, a neutral forum with clear rules of law and procedure capable of resolving claims would not only be more fair to claimants, but also to museums and personal collectors. This article will first discuss the severity and magnitude of Nazi looting …

Will Eeoc V. Waffle House, Inc. Signal The Beginning Of The End For Mandatory Arbitration Agreements In The Employment Context? , Marc A. Altenbernt

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Since the inception of several employment and discrimination statutes, arbitration has grown exponentially as an alternative for the adjudication of employment disputes. The Supreme Court has traditionally held that statutory claims are indeed arbitrable pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). In an effort to end employment discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin," Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"). In order to adequately effect this calling, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") was created as the Act's primary enforcement mechanism. While arbitration agreements under the FAA and …

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 …

A Secret In One District Is No Secret In Another: The Cases Of Merrill Lynch And Preliminary Injunctions Under The Faa , Anahit Tagvoryan

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Public policy favors protecting intellectual property in arbitration, and both Congress and the courts support, and in fact encourage, arbitration of intellectual property disputes. This support stems from the history of favoritism toward private arbitration agreements and other alternative dispute resolution in lieu of judicial adjudication. Because intellectual property disputes often involve commercial parties transacting business across state lines, arbitration is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Availability of provisional remedies such as injunctions has also proven effective in the area of intellectual property disputes. However, unlike the option and process of private arbitration where there is little to …

Immunizing Arbitrators From Claims For Equitable Relief, Michael D. Moberly

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The article begins with a summary of the historical origins of the judicial and arbitral immunity doctrines. Next, the article discusses the courts' refusal to extend judicial immunity to claims for declaratory, injunctive, or other equitable relief, except perhaps in the case of federal judges. The article then explores the propriety of recognizing a similar limitation in cases construing the arbitral immunity doctrine. The article ultimately concludes that (1) arbitrators should be immune from claims for equitable relief as a matter of policy, and (2) in jurisdictions where that result is currently precluded by existing precedent, a comparable result can …

Compulsory Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clauses In The Employment Context After Eeoc V. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps , Maria Wusinich

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In EEOC v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, decided in 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals aligned its view with its sister circuits and with the Supreme Court regarding the enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment discrimination cases. The court held that an employee's agreement to arbitrate a claim arising under federal anti-discrimination law is enforceable. At first glance, it would appear that as far as the judicial branch is concerned, the longstanding issue of the validity of mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context is now settled. This article, in contrast, posits that the courts will be …

Unraveling The Mystery Of Wilko V. Swan: American Arbitration Vacatur Law And The Accidental Demise Of Party Autonomy , James M. Gaitis

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article begins with a brief description of what the Wilko Court said with respect to the vacatur of arbitral awards and how federal and state appellate courts have construed that language. Traditional American arbitration vacatur law, including but not limited to the cases relied upon by the Wilko Court, are then reviewed in depth such that the Wilko decision and the Wilko Court's choice of language may be placed in context and fully examined. The intent and proper operation of the FAA are then discussed based on both the legislative history of the FAA and other authorities that consistently …

Coordinated Transnational Interaction In Civil Litigation And Arbitration, Peter F. Schlosser

Michigan Journal of International Law

About fifteen years ago, an English shipowner chartered his vessel, the Mareva, to time charterers. After a while, the charterers discontinued payment on the charter and the shipowner instituted court proceedings against them. The plaintiff, concerned about the ability and willingness of the defendants to satisfy an expected judgment, simultaneously applied for a preliminary injunction restraining the defendants from disposing of a subcharter which had been paid into their London bank account. The injunction was granted. Since then, injunctions of this kind have been denominated "Mareva injunctions," although it was the second, rather than the first, case where such an …

Labor Law-Arbitration And Award-Judicial Review Of Labor Arbitration Awards Which Rely On The Practices Of The Parties, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Modem collective bargaining agreements typically provide for private arbitration as the means of resolving disputes between employees and management over the interpretation and application of the agreement. In the event the arbitrator's decision is challenged in court by the adversely-affected party, the question of how much judicial deference should be given to the private ruling becomes of some importance. The Supreme Court has set out guidelines which purport to define the proper role of courts in such disputes-that role being for the most part one of judicial deference to arbitrator's decisions. Nevertheless, the appropriate scope of judicial review remains unclear. …

Management And Labor Appraisals And Criticisms Of The Arbitration Process: A Report With Comments, Dallas L. Jones, Russell A. Smith

Michigan Law Review

Although arbitration as a means of resolving disputes arising under collective bargaining agreements has received widespread acceptance in this country/ in recent years there has been some evidence of increasing criticism of the process. As part of a research project dealing with the impact of the 1960 Supreme Court decisions in the Warrior & Gulf "trilogy" and the 1962 Sinclair "trilogy," we decided to ascertain how parties are appraising the arbitration process. We report here the more significant results of this survey along with our evaluation of the criticisms and suggestions which were received.

Labor Law - Arbitration - Power Of Arbitrator To Enjoin Union From Continuing Slowdown, Lawrence M. Kelly

Michigan Law Review

An arbitrator, acting under a collective bargaining agreement which called for a "speedy arbitration" procedure, issued an award enjoining the unions from continuing a slowdown in violation of that clause of the agreement forbidding strikes, lockouts, and slowdowns. A Supreme Court order granted the employers' motion to confirm the award and overruled the unions' cross motion to vacate. The unions claimed that the arbitrator, in issuing the injunction, had exceeded the powers granted him under the agreement and had acted contrary to section 876a of the Civil Practice Act (the New York Anti-Injunction Act). The Appellate Division affirmed the order …

Equity, Ben F. Small Jr.

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.