Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons^™

Hiding Elephants In Mouseholes: Judicial (Mis)Application Of The Federal Arbitration Act To Attorney-Client Arbitration Agreements, Gregory L. Smith

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article criticizes cases and commentary that assume, without argument, that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and its decidedly pro-arbitration jurisprudence apply to determine the enforceability of private attorney-client arbitration agreements, thus preempting state bar rules governing disclosures that lawyers must otherwise provide to clients when proposing private, binding arbitration in place of bar-sponsored arbitration regimes. The author argues that applying the FAA and its jurisprudence to attorney-client arbitration agreements raises significant constitutional issues regarding the states’ recognized authority to regulate the legal profession—an issue that courts and commentators have simply ignored.

Forced Arbitration In Tesla’S Consumer Contracts, Abigail Hug

Arbitration Brief

The Supreme Court has supported the FAA’s preference for enforcing arbitration clauses and has extended it to forced arbitration provisions. In DirecTV v. Imburgia, the Supreme Court upheld a mandatory arbitration clause in a consumer service agreement, which additionally prohibited class arbitration. The Court reasoned that the FAA clearly states that written provisions in contracts that mandate arbitration are enforceable as all other contracts are enforceable. Companies throughout the United States use forced arbitration for employment and consumer contracts, including those for car leases. Forced arbitration clauses in consumer contracts ensure that customers settle their disputes with a company through …

A Uniform, National Body Of Law To Govern The Enforcement Of Arbitration Agreements, Imre S. Szalai

American University Business Law Review

The heart of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is section 2, which contains a federal mandate that arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable, and enforceable; the FAA's remaining provisions help carry out this mandate.

Introductory Remarks, Dana Welch

American University Business Law Review

The year 1925 proved to be eventful for the United States and for the world. The Scopes Monkey Trial placed evolution in the spotlight. The New Yorker published its first issue. The "Grand Ole Opry´ premiered on the radio as the WSM Barn Dance. And fascism threatened Europe as Benito Mussolini dissolved the Italian Parliament and declared himself "Il Duce," the dictator of Italy, while Adolf Hitler published the first volume of Mein Kampf, written from prison. On a lighter note, Washington, D.C., saw the first National Spelling Bee, won by Frank Neuhauser, an eleven-year-old from Kentucky who correctly spelled …

Bringing Section 7 Into The Next Century, Amy J. Schmitz, David M. Brodsky

American University Business Law Review

In 1925, Congress passed a historic piece of legislation, the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), that attempted to change the American judiciary's hostility towards enforcing arbitration agreements and awards. This hostility was rooted in English common law and migrated to the American civil justice system. But in 1925, Congress gave life to the broad use of executory agreements to enforce compliance with contracts through arbitration.

The Right To Arbitrate(?): Integrating Consumer Protection Into Judicial Review Of The Mccarran-Ferguson Act And The New York Convention, Rachel Bamberger

American University Business Law Review

International commercial arbitration has grown increasingly popular as an alternative method of dispute resolution. This Comment explores the struggle courts face when they must determine whether to apply the New York Convention, an international treaty that recognizes and compels arbitration agreements, or a federal statute known as the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which delegates authority to the states to regulate insurance. Conflict arises when foreign insurers seek to compel arbitration under the New York Convention in states with antiarbitration insurance laws, and courts must choose between upholding domestic state laws or honoring the Treaty.

This Comment examines the method of analysis used …

Section 4 -- Jury, Trial: A Misnomer In The Faa, Tracey B. Frisch

American University Business Law Review

The purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), according to the Supreme Court, was not merely to reverse judicial hostility towards arbitration by placing agreements to arbitrate on the same footing as other contracts but to actively promote the use of arbitration on a national scale. It is not surprising then that most provisions of the FAA envision limited court intervention into the arbitration process.

The Problem Of Unreasoned Reasoned Awards And The Judicial Failure To Remedy It: Statutory And Rule Solutions, John B. Mcarthur, Mark Travis

American University Business Law Review

American arbitrators have long been choosing between two common forms of awards: "reasoned awards" and "standard awards" with no reasons enumerated. Yet neither arbitration rules nor statutes define "reasoned award." This lack of guidance has gotten arbitration in trouble and threatens its ability to satisfy users' needs.

Adding A Data Disclosure Requirement To The Faa: An Overdue Reform, Richard Frankel

American University Business Law Review

Artificial intelligence (AI) and predictive analytics are transforming almost every sector of society. The field of dispute resolution is no exception to this trend. Lawyers in emerging disputes are hungry for data about arbitrators and judges, prior decisions, similar disputes, and anything else they can get their hands on.

Towards The Faa's Next Century: Clarifying Disclosure Requirements In Arbitration, Andrea K. Schneider, Brian Farkas

American University Business Law Review

In the summer of 2024, all eyes were on Paris. Thousands of athletes from over 200 countries competed in over 300 sports. The Olympics is nationalism at its healthiest: cheering for one's own nation, while recognizing the fundamentally transnational human values of pluralism, diversity, and aspiration.

Facilitating Trust Arbitration By Amending The Federal Arbitration Act, S. I. Strong

American University Business Law Review

Over the last few years, a new dispute resolution procedure has burst onto the domestic and international stage: trust arbitration, which allows an arbitration provision located in a trust to trigger arbitration of "internal" trust disputes arising either between trust beneficiaries or between beneficiaries and the trustee.

A Simple Solution To An Infinite Problem: Curbing Arbitration Provisions That Exceed The Scope Of The Federal Arbitration Act, Michael Russo

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In 2012, Diana Mey opened a new cell phone line with AT&T Mobility LLC ("Mobility"), the AT&T, Inc. ("AT&T") subsidiary responsible for AT&T's mobile services business in the United States. This required Mey to enter into the AT&T Wireless Customer Agreement, which contained an arbitration clause covering "all disputes and claims" "arising out of or relating to any aspect of the relationship[.]" Further, it applied as between each party's respective "subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, employees, predecessors in interest, successors, and assigns, as well as all authorized or unauthorized users or beneficiaries of services or Devices under this or prior Agreements …

A Muddy Mess: The Supreme Court’S Jurisprudence On Jurisdiction For Arbitration Matters, Kristen M. Blankley

University of Miami Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2022 Badgerow v. Waters decision at- tempts to create a bright-line rule regarding access to federal courts to hear arbitration matters. On its face, the Badgerow majority opinion reads like a straightforward exercise in textualism. Badgerow interpreted the judicial test for jurisdiction under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) provision regarding vacatur differently than it interpreted the jurisdictional test for a motion to compel under a different part of the statute. However, Badgerow leaves courts, which were already struggling to decipher the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision of Vaden v. Discover Bank, with a significant number of outstanding questions. …

Escaping Arbitration And Class Action Waivers For Harassment Because Of Pregnancy, Sexual Orientation Or Gender Identity, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Publications

In 2022, Congress amended the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) through the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act. This amendment is being abbreviated to a rather clumsy acronym: EFASASHA. EFASASHA allows a person alleging sexual harassment or sexual assault to invalidate certain arbitration agreements and joint-action waivers. Congress passed the Act in response to testimony in which workers alleged that serial sexual harassment and assault continued because workers' claims were forced into private arbitration and could not be publicly adjudicated.

This Essay argues that the language that Congress used in EFASASHA is much broader than its title …

Indiana In The Midst Of #Metoo: The Argument For Enforcing Arbitration In Sexual Harassment Claims, Jonathan Cisneros

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This note argues that it is in the best interest of sexual harassment victims and the state of Indiana to not follow suit in passing legislation that prohibits employers from requiring mandatory arbitration in sexual harassment cases. This is based on an analysis of the potential factors underlying Indiana’s current lack of legislative movement, the weight of the arguments for and against mandatory arbitration, and consideration of the preemption issues surrounding state laws banning mandatory arbitration. Part II sets the foundation for this note by laying out the most pertinent parts of the FAA and analyzing how the U.S. Supreme …

You Be The Judge: Analyzing When The Federal Arbitration Act's Judicial Review Standards Apply In State Court, Max Birmingham

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article addresses whether, when the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) governs an arbitration, the FAA’s judicial review standards apply in state court and preempt application of different state law judicial review standards. This argument proceeds as follows: Part I provides an introduction. Part II analyzes the procedural reform intent of the FAA and why the statute seeks to standardize the arbitration process. Part III reviews the judicial review of arbitration awards as promulgated in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. Part IV reviews the generations of FAA cases which have been held to be preempted by SCOTUS. Part V …

The Paga Saga, Tamar Meshel

Pepperdine Law Review

Employees routinely enter into employment contracts that contain arbitration ‎agreements and prohibit ‎them from bringing class and/or representative actions. These employees may therefore only bring claims against their ‎employers, ‎whether contractual or statutory, in arbitration on an individual basis. Such arbitration agreements and the class/representative action waivers that they contain are enforced nationwide pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In California, however, a judge-made rule (the Iskanian rule) prohibits the enforcement of representative action waivers found in arbitration agreements with respect to employees’ claims of Labor Code violations under California’s Private Attorney General Act (PAGA). A judicial battle is …

In Contracts We Trust (And No One Can Change Their Mind)! There Should Be No Special Treatment For Religious Arbitration, Michael J. Broyde, Alexa J. Windsor

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Arbitration In The Age Of Covid: Examining Arbitration's Move Online, Amy J. Schmitz

Faculty Publications

Arbitration has been moving online over time with the growth of the Internet and Online Dispute Resolution ("ODR"), which includes use of technology to assist online negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and variations thereof Online Arbitration ("OArb ") is nonetheless a unique subset of ODR because it usually culminates in a final and binding award by a neutral third party that is enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). Indeed, I have written about OArb on prior occasions, due to its unique status under the FAA and other arbitration laws. However, OArb was relatively limited until the COVID-19 pandemic sparked the acceleration …

Express Preclusion Of The Federal Arbitration Act For All Bankruptcy-Related Matters, John R. Hardison

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article sets forth a more solid justification for bankruptcy courts to refuse to order arbitration of any matter related to and affecting a bankruptcy case through express preclusion. First, this Article describes the historical development of the Supreme Court’s holdings on preclusion of the FAA in general and on the courts of appeals’ current formulation of a bankruptcy exception to the FAA. Next, this Article discusses the statutory, historical, and policy-based support for reading the bankruptcy jurisdictional provisions as creating an express exception to the FAA, or alternatively as supporting an implied exception to the FAA. As discussed, …

Arbitration Of Worker Contracts: New Prime's Proper Statutory Interpretation Of The 1925 Federal Arbitration Act, Margaret L. Moses

Faculty Publications & Other Works

In 1925, the Congress that adopted the Federal Arbitration Act did not intend for it to cover any workers’ contracts. However, this changed dramatically when the Supreme Court determined in Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams (2001) that all workers’ contracts were covered except for transportation workers. Thus, today, thousands of workers are forced into adhesion contracts requiring arbitration. However, the recent unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in New Prime v. Oliveira unequivocally declares that the proper way to interpret the Act is to give it the meaning it had when Congress enacted the statute. This very reasonable conclusion …

The State Qui Tam To Enforce Employment Law, Andrew Elmore

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the states' response to Epic Systems v. Lewis, which held enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) mandatory arbitration agreements that require employees to waive their participation in collective and class actions in employment contracts. Recent evidence shows that mandatory arbitration can erode access to justice for and deterrence of employment law claims. States in response are considering qui tam statutes, which assign the state interests in penalties for employment law violations to private enforcers in return for a bounty, to substitute for the loss of class action enforcement after Epic Systems.

These statutes can …

Arbitration Agreements – What Is The Employee Actually Signing Up For?, Kennedy Poe

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

This note will examine the various effects and implications the Supreme Court’s decision concerning the legality of class action waivers within employee-employer contracts will have on employers, employees, and the contracts made between them. Part I will identify class action waivers within an employment contract’s arbitration agreement and will further elaborate upon the legal implications of such waivers being present in the contract. Part II will then discuss the history of the NLRA and assess its present-day role in employee–employer contract formation, in order to provide clarity as to the dispute that has arisen between the NLRA and class action …

Two Bites At The Apple: The Prejudicial Burden In Arbitration Waiver, Alexander H. Weathersby

Georgia Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Class Dismissed: Compelling A Look At Jurisprudence Surrounding Class Arbitration And Proposing Solutions To Asymmetric Bargaining Power Between Parties, Matthew R. Hamielec

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Class actions and arbitrations have existed since the United States’ inception. Since the mid-twentieth century, both Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have helped arbitration blossom from litigation’s overshadowed alternative to a prominent means of resolving disputes. Soon, the commercial industry proceeded to incorporate arbitration provisions in their consumer and employment contracts. That way, when a dispute arose between the business and a person, the business would arbitrate with claimants individually. Plaintiffs’ attorneys who favored collective action proceedings like class actions, however, pushed for courts’ allowance of class arbitration—a class proceeding conducted within an arbitration’s confines.

Corporations litigated such class …

Directv, Inc. V. Imburgia And The Continued Ascendance Of Federal Common Law: Class-Action Waivers And Mandatory Arbitration Under The Federal Arbitration Act, Michael J. Yelnosky

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arbitration Law In Tension After Hall Street: Accuracy Of Finality?, Stanley A. Leasure

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Changing The Game: The Effects Of The 2012 Revision Of The Icc Arbitration Rules On The Icc Model Arbitration Clause For Trust Disputes, Colin Connor

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Arbitration Case Law Update 2016, Jill I. Gross

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This chapter identifies decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and selected federal and high state courts in the past year that interpret and apply the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). This chapter also analyzes the impact some of these cases might have on securities arbitration practice.