Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication Year
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
De Novo A No No: Contractually Expanded Judicial Review Clauses Do Not Preclude Faa Application In State Court Unless The Parties Make It Intentionally Clear The Faa Does Not Apply In Their Agreement - Raymond James Fin. Servs., Inc. V. Honea, Tom Swoboda
Journal of Dispute Resolution
This Note addresses a recent Alabama Supreme Court decision concerning the issue of contracted appellate review in arbitration agreements. After analyzing the history of enforcement of arbitration agreements between contracting parties in U.S. Supreme Court precedent, this Note will explore the most recent Supreme Court decision regarding when parties may seek judicial review of arbitration awards. The Federal Arbitration Act's (FAA) preemptive effect over state court law will also be addressed, as the Supreme Court was not thoroughly explanatory on the issue. This Note will also evaluate and compare another state court ruling in Pennsylvania on the same judicial review …
Irreconcilable Deferences - The Troubled Marriage Of Judicial Review Standards Under The Steelworkers Trilogy And The Federal Arbitration Act, Michael H. Leroy
Irreconcilable Deferences - The Troubled Marriage Of Judicial Review Standards Under The Steelworkers Trilogy And The Federal Arbitration Act, Michael H. Leroy
Journal of Dispute Resolution
To explore the ramifications of this hybrid, labor-employment discrimination award, I ask what standards would a court apply to review an arbitrator's ruling. The Steelworker's Trilogy-three Supreme Court decisions that explain to courts how to review awards under section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act-pronounce deferential standards. But until now, individual employment awards have typically been reviewed under section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or state law equivalents. My research on labor awards and individual employment awards show that courts do not behave the same under these different regimes. They enforce about seventy-two percent of labor awards, but …
Arbitration Nation: While Arbitration Grows, Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards May Be Shrinking, F. Shabnam Nouraie
Arbitration Nation: While Arbitration Grows, Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards May Be Shrinking, F. Shabnam Nouraie
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In Sands v. Menard, Inc., the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin upheld an arbitration award reinstating a discharged attorney to her position as in-house counsel. On appeal, the court refused to vacate the reinstatement order, notwithstanding the fact that reinstatement was not requested or desired by either party, the effect of reinstatement was likely to violate the ethical rules that bind attorneys, and other remedies were available to compensate the aggrieved party. This note explores the limited but important role that judicial review plays, and will continue to play, in arbitration and how this role affected the outcome of Sands …
Crowning The New King: The Statutory Arbitrator And The Demise Of Judicial Review, Michael H. Leroy
Crowning The New King: The Statutory Arbitrator And The Demise Of Judicial Review, Michael H. Leroy
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Judicial review of arbitration awards is highly deferential-but when does it become rubber stamping? Using original data, I find that federal courts vacated only 4.3 percent of 162 disputed arbitration awards. A sub-sample of forty-four employment discrimination arbitration awards under Title VII produced similar results. By comparison, federal Courts of Appeals in 2006 reversed 12.9 percent of 5,917 rulings made by civil court judges on the merits of legal claims.
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In exchange for a speedy, economical dispute resolution process, parties that submit to binding arbitration assume the risk that an arbitrator might misapply the law. United States Supreme Court precedent and federal law favor agreements to arbitrate by limiting judicial review of arbitral awards and requiring courts to "rigorously enforce arbitration agreements." These judicial constraints support the arbitral goals of efficiency and finality by reducing the risk that arbitral awards will be vacated on appeal. To balance the risk that arbitrators may abuse this standard of review, courts have supplemented restricted judicial review with a doctrine that allows an arbitral …
Politics And Judgment, Suzanna Sherry
Politics And Judgment, Suzanna Sherry
Missouri Law Review
Two hundred years after its most famous invocation in Marbury v. Madison, judicial review has apparently lost its luster. Despite its global spread, it is in disrepute in its country of origin. The mainstream American academic attitude toward judicial review as practiced by the modem Supreme Court ranges from open hostility to a position similar to Winston Churchill's on democracy: It is the worst way to implement a Constitution, except for all the rest. In this essay, I want to explain the source of the hostility, defend judicial review against its critics, and make a few suggestions for improvement.
Questioning Deference, Christina E. Wells
Questioning Deference, Christina E. Wells
Faculty Publications
This article examines the accepted axiom that courts should defer to the government's actions during national security crises even when such actions potentially violate citizens' constitutional rights. The paper questions two assumptions underlying that axiom - first, that executive officials are best equipped to determine when security needs justify liberty infringements and, second, that judges are particularly unqualified to meddle in security issues, even when civil liberties are involved. Relying on psychological theories regarding the role that fear plays in skewing risk assessment and historical analyses of past crises, the paper argues that times of crisis lend themselves to unnecessary …
Retaining Bargained-For Finality And Judicial Review In Labor Arbitration Decisions: Dual Interests Preserved In Major League Baseball Players Association V. Garvey - Major League Baseball Players Assn. V. Garvey, Emily J. Huitsing
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Arbitration has for years been the principal means of labor dispute resolution. As a part of labor contracts, workers agree to arbitrate disputes with their employers, bargaining for this forum as their choice method of dispute resolution. Occasionally, however, the decision of an arbitrator strays far from what a court believes the outcome of the dispute between employer and employee should be. In these cases, a conflict arises between the finality and stability of the bargained-for arbitrator's decision and the need for judicial upset of clearly errant arbitral decisions
Modifying The Standard Of Judicial Review Of Labor Arbitration Awards: A Comparison To Administrative Review Hearings - Osram Sylvania, Inc. V. Teamsters Local Union No. 528, Elizabeth Tenorio
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Since their inception during the post-war years, collective bargaining agreements have been the primary method used by unions to get employers to deal with issues of importance to their labor force. However, the past few decades have seen a rapid decline in union membership as well as union effectiveness. 3 This casenote will look at whether or not the instant decision, Zcon, will be a contributing factor in the continuing downward spiral for unions.
Contracting For Judicial Review Of Arbitration Awards: Can An Errors Of Law Clause Provide Two Bites Of The Apple - Gateway Technologies, Inc. V. Mci Telecommunications Corp., Brian T. Mccartney
Contracting For Judicial Review Of Arbitration Awards: Can An Errors Of Law Clause Provide Two Bites Of The Apple - Gateway Technologies, Inc. V. Mci Telecommunications Corp., Brian T. Mccartney
Journal of Dispute Resolution
This Note will proceed in five sections. Section II will set forth the factual framework of the Gateway case and the holding of the Fifth Circuit. Section III will briefly examine the legal background behind the standard of review for arbitration awards. Section IV will explore the analysis and decision of the Fifth Circuit in Gateway. Finally, section V will comment on the Gateway court's holding and discuss its policy implications. This Note will conclude that arbitration agreements which purport to provide judicial review for "errors of law" violate separation of powers and the public policy which underlies arbitration. Consequently, …
Public Policy Exception: A Narrow Exception To Judicial Review Or An Independent Means Of Avoiding Arbitration Agreements - Exxon Corp. V. Baton Rouge Oil And Chemical Workers Union, The, Elizabeth Tenorio
Journal of Dispute Resolution
The Federal Arbitration Act advances a strong desire to encourage parties in labor management disputes to utilize arbitration in lieu of litigation.' For this reason, judicial review of an arbitrator's award is construed narrowly by three specific provisions? In recent years, a public policy exception to this strict standard of review has developed,4 and its use has exploded. This Note discusses the impact of this public policy exception on both arbitration and judicial forums. In addition, this Note highlights the potential for abuse when the exception is not limited and applied with care.
Judicial Review Of Contract Interpretation By Labor Arbitrators: Whose Brand Of Industrial Justice - Houston Lighting & (And) Power Co. V. Int'l Bhd. Of Elec. Workers, Local Union No. 66, Michael G. Munsell
Journal of Dispute Resolution
The United States Supreme Court has prescribed the deference owed to an arbitrator's interpretation of labor agreements. The Court's decisions have made clear the narrow grounds upon which an arbitration award may be reversed. In Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Int'l Bhd of Elec. Workers, Local Union No. 66, the employer claimed that the labor arbitrator had exceeded his authority by misinterpreting the labor agreement. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had to weigh the policy of deference to the arbitrator's interpretation against the need to ensure that the arbitrator acted within the authority which the parties to the …
Railroading Essential Rights: The Status Of Judicial Review Of Alleged Due Process Violations In Arbitration Hearings Under The Railway Labor Act - Shafii V. P.L.C. British Airways, Penelope Hopper
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In the American judicial system, no litigant may be denied life, liberty or property without due process of the law. The rights to representation, to have a fair hearing, and to have the opportunity to present evidence on one's own behalf are ingrained in our concept of "justice." When one agrees to submit a conflict to an alternative forum of dispute resolution, are those essential rights lost? This Note examines those questions in the context of a congressional act mandating arbitration as the mode of conflict resolution in the transportation industry