Recent Developments in Federal and State Arbitration Law
|
|
- Dustin Long
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Recent Developments in Federal and State Arbitration Law by Shelly L. Ewald, Senior Partner Watt Tieder Newsletter, Winter Despite the extensive history and widespread adoption of arbitration as an alternative disputes resolution procedure, the judiciary continues to issue new rulings on procedure and substantive questions of the arbitration process. The past year brought many new procedural and jurisdictional decisions. Procedural Developments Subpoena Power Under the FAA While some circuit courts have restricted an arbitrator s authority to issue subpoenas for depositions or third party pre-hearing document discovery, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently confirmed an arbitrator s power to compel testimony and documents from non-party witnesses at both preliminary and final hearings conducted by a panel. Stolt-Nielsen SA v. Celanese AG, 2005 WL (2d Cir. November 21, 2005). In Stolt-Nielsen, the court held that Section 7 of the FAA authorized a panel to issue a subpoena compelling non-parties to appear and provide testimony and documents to the arbitration panel at a hearing held in connection with the dispute. The court conducted an extensive analysis of the questions of subject matter jurisdiction and the immediate appealability of the district court s refusal to quash a subpoena. The court rejected the respondent s assertions that the claimants and panel had conspired to circumvent the FAA restrictions on pre-hearing, third-party discovery by convening a hearing in advance of the merits hearing. The court expressly declined to decide the issue of whether Section 7 authorizes arbitrators to issue discovery-type subpoenas to those who are not parties to the arbitration, which has been previously rejected by the Third and Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Hay Group, Inc. v. E.B.S. Acquisition Corp., 360 F.3d 404 (3d Cir. 2004); Comsat Corp. v. Nat l Sci. Found., 190 F.3d 269 (4th Cir. 1999). Order from AAA Arbitrator Is Binding Upon Issuance In Centurion Air Cargo, Inc. v. United Parcel Service, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that an AAA arbitrator s order requiring the posting of a bond was binding upon its issuance and did not require affirmation from a court to bring it into effect. Centurion Air Cargo, 420 F.3d 1146 (11 th Cir. 2005). The 1
2 court, concurring with the Fourth and Fifth Circuit Courts of Appeal, held that an arbitrator s order was binding on the parties unless they expressly agreed otherwise and did not require affirmation from a court. Arbitrator Disclosure: State Conflict-of-Interest Disclosure Standards Not Preempted by FAA On October 26, 2005, the California Court of Appeals vacated an arbitration award after finding that the arbitrator did not disclose his employment as a neutral in another case involving the same attorneys, as required by the California disclosure standards. Ovitz v. Schulman, 133 Cal.App.4th 830 (2005). In 2002, California adopted strict ethics standards for arbitrators that require broad disclosures about potential conflicts of interest that could call their neutrality into question. West s Ann. Cal. Codes, Vol. 23, PT.4 (2005), App. To Cal. Rules of Court, Div. VI, pp The California Code of Civil Procedure requires that awards be vacated upon a showing that the arbitrator failed timely to disclose a ground for disqualification. Cal. Code Civ. Proc., The FAA employs a different standard, permitting vacation of an award only on a showing of evident partiality by an arbitrator. 9 U.S.C. 10(a)(2). After receiving an untimely disclosure regarding the arbitrator s role as a neutral in another matter involving the same attorneys, the respondent requested that the AAA disqualify the arbitrator. The AAA refused and the arbitrator issued a final award. The trial court granted the respondent s petition to vacate the award, which was upheld on appeal. The California court held that the California law was not preempted and that the FAA s provisions for vacating awards apply only in federal court not state court. Jurisdiction, Arbitrability and Standard of Review Jurisdiction Over Challenges to Arbitrability Based on Void or Voidable Contracts On December 1, 2005, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. John Cardegna (No ), an appeal from the Florida Supreme Court, regarding the jurisdiction of courts and arbitrators over arbitrability and enforcement issues. The separability doctrine, propounded by the Court in Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967), provided that claims of fraud in the inducement of a contract with an arbitration clause would be decided by the arbitrator, but the issue of whether there was an agreement to arbitrate was an issue for the courts. In Buckeye Cashing, the Florida Supreme Court held that courts, not arbitrators, had jurisdiction to examine contracts that are alleged to be void ab initio, before enforcing an 2
3 arbitration clauses. Cardegna v. Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc., 894 So.2d 860 (Fla. 2005). During oral arguments, the justices commented on the distinction between void and voidable contracts, and the impact on the business community and potential differences in state by-state enforcement of arbitration agreements based upon their potential ruling. Non-Signatory Required to Submit to Arbitration Estoppel In In re Weekley Homes, L.P., the Texas Supreme Court considered the doctrine of direct benefits estoppel and held that when a nonparty consistently and knowingly insists that others treat it as a party, it cannot later turn its back on the portions of the contract, such as an arbitration clause, that it finds distasteful. 49 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 55 (2005). The court noted that it would apply state law and attempt to remain consistent with federal arbitration decisions relying on estoppel to require non-signatories to arbitrate disputes. Non-Signatory Arbitration Rights Arbitrability In Contec Corp. v. Remote Solution Co., Ltd., the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the issue of whether a non-signatory could enforce an arbitration clause was an arbitrability question to be determined by the arbitrator and not the court. Contec Corp., 398 F.3d 205 (2d Cir. 2005). The court noted that the FAA presumes that issues of arbitrability are reserved for the courts, but the presumption is negated where the parties clearly agreed to have an arbitrator decide the issue, in this case, by explicitly incorporating the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the AAA. Contec involved a successor entity to a contract where the original signatory was attempting to avoid the effect of the arbitration clause; therefore, there was no question whether there was an ascent to be bound by the clause. The Second Circuit rejected the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Microchip Tech., Inc. v. U.S. 13 Phillips Corp., 367 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2004), which held that any question of whether a non-signatory can be compelled to arbitrate is reserved for the courts, not the arbitrator. On November 8, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a non-signatory to an enforceable arbitration agreement was not authorized to seek an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act. In Re Universal Service Fund v. Sprint Comm. Co.; AT&T Corp., 428 F.3d 940 (11 th Cir. 2005). In a previous action, the district court had compelled arbitration of the claims of residential customers of MCI. Sprint and AT&T then moved to compel the arbitration of claims of MCI s business customers based on equitable estoppel, as the business customers had agreed to arbitrate with MCI. The district court denied the motion and Sprint and AT&T filed an interlocutory appeal. 3
4 The court held that statutes allowing interlocutory appeals should be narrowly construed and determined that the defendants could not invoke the court s interlocutory appellate jurisdiction. Standard of Review: Circuits Split Over Parties Right to Alter the FAA Standards On October 14, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that contracting parties could alter the standards for judicial review of arbitral awards, but only by explicit contractual language evincing the parties clear intent to subject the arbitration award to a different standard of review. Puerto Rico Telephone Co. v. U.S. Phone Mfg. Corp., 427 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2005). The court found that the contractual choice of law provision, stating that the contract would be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, was insufficient to demonstrate that the parties had agreed to judicial review of the award for errors of law as required by Puerto Rican law. On October 31, 2005, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that parties may contractually limit appellate review of arbitration awards because it serves the underlying purpose of the FAA to encourage arbitration and reduce litigation costs. MACTEC, Inc. v. Steven Gorelick, 427 F.3d 821 (10 th Cir. 2005). The arbitration agreement at issue specified that the award rendered by the arbitrator shall be final and nonappealable and may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The court ruled that a provision that restricted district court review of the award would fail because if the court were empowered to confirm an award, it must retain the ability to vacate the award; however, limiting review beyond the district court was enforceable. These decisions deepen the already existing split between the circuit courts regarding the right to contract for a different standard of review. The Seventh, Eight and Ninth Circuit Courts of appeal have ruled or indicated that they would not allow parties to contract for a different standard of review. Kyocera Corp. v. Prudential-Bache Trade Servs., Inc., 341 F.3d 987 (9 th Cir. 2003)(en banc); UHC Mgmt. Co. v. Computer Scis. Corp., 148 F.3d 992 (8 th Cir. 1998)(indicating without deciding that it would not allow parties to contract for expanded judicial review); Chicago Typographical Union NO. 16 v. Chicago Sun-Times, Inc., 935 F.2d 1501 (7 th Cir. 1991)(construing Taft-Hartley Act, but suggesting that parties cannot contract for vacatur standards different than those set forth in the FAA). The Third, Fifth and Sixth Circuits have ruled that parties are free to contract for a revised standard of review as long as there is clear language authorizing courts to recognize it. Roadway Package Sys., Inc. v. Kayser, 257 F.3d 287 (3d Cir. 2001); 4
5 Gateway Technologies Inc. v. MCI, 64 F.3d 993 (5 th Cir. 1995); Jacada Ltd. v. International Mktg. Strategies, 401 F.3d 701 (6 th Cir. 2005). Interim Remedies New York Enacts Legislation Authorizing Provisional Remedies in International Arbitration Cases On October 4, 2005, Governor Pataki signed legislation granting state courts new authority to issue provisional remedies in international arbitration cases, reversing a longstanding interpretation of state law that restricted such remedies to domestic cases. A.B. 8296, 238 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. October 4, 2005). The new law reverses the judicial interpretation of Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 7502(c), which describes the power of courts to issue provisional remedies. In Cooper v. Ateliers de la Motobecane, 57 N.Y. 2d 408 (1982), the New York Court of Appeals had ruled that New York state courts were permitted to issue provisional remedies only in domestic cases. The new statute will make New York law consistent with the laws of other states and federal and international laws that authorize the issuance of provisional remedies in international arbitrations. Under the new law, states courts are permitted to issue temporary injunctions or attachments in international arbitrations, whether or not the dispute is governed by the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, so long as the relief requested is necessary to protect assets that are key to an eventual award. An arbitration must be commenced within thirty days of issuance of the order of attachment or preliminary injunction. Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, L.L.P Greensboro Drive, Suite 100 McLean Virginia
Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna*
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna* I. INTRODUCTION In a decision that lends further credence to the old adage that consumers should always beware of the small print, the United
More informationARBITRATION: CHALLENGES TO A MOTION TO COMPEL
ARBITRATION: CHALLENGES TO A MOTION TO COMPEL TARA L. SOHLMAN 214.712.9563 Tara.Sohlman@cooperscully.com 2019 This paper and/or presentation provides information on general legal issues. I is not intended
More informationAfter Stolt-Nielsen, Circuits Split, But AAA Filings Continue
MEALEY S TM International Arbitration Report After Stolt-Nielsen, Circuits Split, But AAA Filings Continue by Gregory A. Litt Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP New York Tina Praprotnik Duke Law
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 561 U. S. (2010) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationArbitration-Related Litigation in Texas
Arbitration-Related Litigation in Texas MARK TRACHTENBERG Overview Pre-arbitration litigation Procedures for enforcing arbitration clause Strategies for defeating arbitration clause Post-arbitration litigation
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas OPINION No. 04-13-00206-CV SCHMIDT LAND SERVICES, INC., Appellant v. UNIFIRST CORPORATION and UniFirst Holdings Inc. Successor in Merger to UniFirst Holdings
More informationCase 1:08-cv JSR Document 151 Filed 05/23/16 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:08-cv-02875-JSR Document 151 Filed 05/23/16 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------x LARYSSA JOCK, et al., Plaintiffs, 08 Civ.
More informationArbitration Discovery Has Its Limits
Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com Arbitration Discovery Has Its Limits Law360,
More informationA Second Bite At The Arbitration Apple: The AAA s New Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules
A Second Bite At The Arbitration Apple: The AAA s New Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules by Nathan W. Lambeth, Associate Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, L.L.P.* Introduction A construction contractor
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V., ET AL VERSUS NO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V., ET AL CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 14-1191 TRC ACQUISITION, LLC SECTION N (2) ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court
More informationCommencing the Arbitration
Chapter 6 Commencing the Arbitration David C. Singer* 6:1 Procedural Rules Governing Commencement of Arbitration 6:1.1 Revised Uniform Arbitration Act 6:2 Applicable Rules of Arbitral Institutions 6:2.1
More informationEthical and Practical Guidance to Avoiding Pitfalls When Drafting Arbitration Clauses. October 11, 2016
Ethical and Practical Guidance to Avoiding Pitfalls When Drafting Arbitration Clauses October 11, 2016 LIONEL M. SCHOOLER JACKSON WALKER, L.L.P. 1401 McKinney, Suite 1900 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77010 (713) 752-4200
More informationCase 4:17-cv Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 04/13/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:17-cv-01044 Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 04/13/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION GEMINI INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO.
More informationCase 3:09-cv B Document 17 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 9 PageID 411 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:09-cv-01860-B Document 17 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 9 PageID 411 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION FLOZELL ADAMS, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09-CV-1860-B
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CVS HEALTH CORPORATION; CAREMARK, LLC; CAREMARK PCS, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. VIVIDUS, LLC, FKA HM Compounding Services, LLC; HMX SERVICES,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:07-CV DCK
United States Surety v. Hanover R.S. Limited Partnership et al Doc. 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:07-CV-00381-DCK UNITED
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-74 ALEXANDER L. KAPLAN et ) Ano, ) Plaintiffs/Petitioners, ) ) vs. ) ) KIMBALL HILL HOMES ) FLORIDA, INC. ) Defendant/Respondent. ) Case No. 2D05-575 And CONSOLIDATED
More informationThe Pre-Hearing Subpoena Powers of the Modern-Day Arbitrator
University of Texas at Austin From the SelectedWorks of Benjamin P Deninger February 24, 2013 The Pre-Hearing Subpoena Powers of the Modern-Day Arbitrator Benjamin P Deninger Available at: https://works.bepress.com/benjamin_deninger/1/
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 16-41674 Document: 00514283638 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/21/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT ARCHER AND WHITE SALES, INC., United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:11-cv-06209-AET -LHG Document 11 Filed 12/12/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 274 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITY CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. Petitioner,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No PAUL GREEN SCHOOL OF ROCK MUSIC FRANCHISING, LLC. JIM R. SMITH, Appellant.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 09-2718 PAUL GREEN SCHOOL OF ROCK MUSIC FRANCHISING, LLC. v. JIM R. SMITH, Appellant. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationARBITRATION RULES. Arbitration Rules Archive. 1. Agreement of Parties
ARBITRATION RULES 1. Agreement of Parties The parties shall be deemed to have made these rules a part of their arbitration agreement whenever they have provided for arbitration by ADR Services, Inc. (hereinafter
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 561 U. S. (2010) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 09 497 RENT-A-CENTER, WEST, INC., PETITIONER v. ANTONIO JACKSON ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 4, 2010 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 4, 2010 Session FRANKE ELLIOTT, ET AL. v. ICON IN THE GULCH, LLC Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 09-477-I Claudia Bonnyman,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED JUL 18 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS JANE ROES, 1-2, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
More informationThe Supreme Court will shortly be considering
Arbitration at a Cross Road: Will the Supreme Court Hold the Federal Arbitration Act Trumps Federal Labor Laws? By John Jay Range and Bryan Cleveland The Supreme Court will shortly be considering three
More informationSTREAMLINED JAMS STREAMLINED ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES
JAMS STREAMLINED ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES Effective JULY 15, 2009 STREAMLINED JAMS STREAMLINED ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES JAMS provides arbitration and mediation services from Resolution Centers
More informationChicken or Egg: Applying the Age- Old Question to Class Waivers in Employee Arbitration Agreements
Chicken or Egg: Applying the Age- Old Question to Class Waivers in Employee Arbitration Agreements By Bonnie Burke, Lawrence & Bundy LLC and Christina Tellado, Reed Smith LLP Companies with employees across
More informationNO CV. IN RE MARK CECIL PROVINE, Relator. Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus * * * NO.
Opinion issued December 10, 2009 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-09-00769-CV IN RE MARK CECIL PROVINE, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus * * *
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv AT. versus
Case: 11-15587 Date Filed: 07/12/2013 Page: 1 of 16 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 11-15587 D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-02975-AT SOUTHERN COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES,
More informationStreamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures
RESOLUTIONS, LLC s GUIDE TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures 1. Scope of Rules The RESOLUTIONS, LLC Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures ("Rules") govern binding
More informationCase 6:14-cv CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331
Case 6:14-cv-01400-CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION MARRIOTT OWNERSHIP RESORTS, INC., MARRIOTT VACATIONS
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 No. 10-0734 444444444444 AMERICO LIFE, INC., AMERICO FINANCIAL LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY, GREAT SOUTHERN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE OHIO STATE LIFE
More informationAre Arbitrators Right Even When They Are Wrong?: Second Circuit Upholds Arbitral Ruling Allowing Implicit Reference to Class Arbitration
Arbitration Law Review Volume 4 Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation Article 26 7-1-2012 Are Arbitrators Right Even When They Are Wrong?: Second Circuit Upholds Arbitral Ruling Allowing Implicit Reference
More informationCase 1:16-cv NRB Document 46 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:16-cv-02578-NRB Document 46 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------X RONALD BETHUNE, on behalf of himself and all
More informationMay 7, By: Christopher M. Mason, Steven M. Richards and Brian M. Childs
May 7, 2010 The United States Supreme Court speaks loudly in Stolt- Nielsen: The Federal Arbitration Action Act does not permit class arbitrations when the parties have been silent on the subject By: Christopher
More informationNos /3823/3825/3867/3869/3871/3873
Nos. 02-3820/3823/3825/3867/3869/3871/3873 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ROBERT FAZIO, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. LEHMAN BROTHERS, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants.
More informationwhich shall govern any matters not specifically addressed in these rules.
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PART RULES -- PART 53 These International Arbitration Part Rules supplement the Part 53 Practice Rules, which shall govern any matters not specifically addressed in these rules.
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEVEN MCARDLE, vs. AT&T MOBILITY LLC, et al.,
No. 09-17218 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEVEN MCARDLE, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. AT&T MOBILITY LLC, et al., Defendants-Appellants. On Appeal from the United States District
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION Case No. -cv-0-blf 0 ASUS COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL, et al., v. Plaintiffs, INTERDIGITAL, INC., et al., Defendants. ORDER ()
More informationCase 2:16-cv JAD-VCF Document 29 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ORDER
Case :-cv-0-jad-vcf Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** 0 LISA MARIE BAILEY, vs. Plaintiff, AFFINITYLIFESTYLES.COM, INC. dba REAL ALKALIZED WATER, a Nevada Corporation;
More informationCase 3:17-cv EDL Document 53 Filed 11/17/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-edl Document Filed // Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARCELLA JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC., Defendant. Case No.-cv-0-EDL ORDER GRANTING
More informationAMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION CLASS ACTION AND EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL
AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION CLASS ACTION AND EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL Elizabeth M Laughlin, Claimant v. Case No.: #74 160 Y 00068 12 VMware, Inc., Respondent Partial Final Award on Clause Construction
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 07-0665 444444444444 IN RE MORGAN STANLEY & CO., INC., SUCCESSOR TO MORGAN STANLEY DW, INC., RELATOR 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, 2012
1-1-cv Bakoss v. Lloyds of London 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 01 (Submitted On: October, 01 Decided: January, 01) Docket No. -1-cv M.D.
More informationADR CODE OF PROCEDURE
Last Revised 12/1/2006 ADR CODE OF PROCEDURE Rules & Procedures for Arbitration RULE 1: SCOPE OF RULES A. The arbitration Rules and Procedures ( Rules ) govern binding arbitration of disputes or claims
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II WAQAS SALEEMI, a single man, and FAROOQ SHARYAR, a single man, Respondents, v. DOCTOR S ASSOCIATES, INC., a Florida corporation, PUBLISHED
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2007 CHARLES BOYD CONSTRUCTION INC., Appellant, v. Case No. 5D06-2168 VACATION BEACH, INC., Appellee. / Opinion filed
More informationCase: 4:15-cv JAR Doc. #: 21 Filed: 08/05/16 Page: 1 of 13 PageID #: 302
Case: 4:15-cv-01361-JAR Doc. #: 21 Filed: 08/05/16 Page: 1 of 13 PageID #: 302 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION TIMOTHY H. JONES, Plaintiff, v. No. 4:15-cv-01361-JAR
More informationLIST OF CHAPTERS VOLUME 1 INTRODUCTION TO ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN COLORADO INTRODUCTION TO COLORADO AND FEDERAL LAWS OF ARBITRATION
LIST OF CHAPTERS VOLUME 1 Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Chapter 14 Chapter 15 Chapter 16 INTRODUCTION
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JENNIFER L. LASTER; ANDREW THOMPSON; ELIZABETH VOORHIES, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and on behalf of
More informationUpdate. Civil Litigation. Non-Party Discovery in Commercial Arbitration: Legal Hurdles and Practical Suggestions. Civil Litigation Section.
Volume 10, No. 3 Civil Litigation Section Chair Janis L. Wilson Chair-elect Stanley J. Parker Vice Chair Malcolm L. MacGregor Secretary Robert E. Rosenthal Treasurer David R. Fine Immediate Past Chair
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 23 Filed: 08/22/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:148
Case: 1:16-cv-02127 Document #: 23 Filed: 08/22/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:148 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CATHERINE GONZALEZ, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 14 011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEE MORE LIGHT INVESTMENTS, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MORGAN STANLEY
More informationArbitration Law Update. David Salton March 31, 2010
Arbitration Law Update David Salton March 31, 2010 TOPICS JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ARBITRATION AWARDS WHEN CAN AN AWARD BE OVERTURNED? WAIVING YOUR RIGHT TO ARBITRATE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT v. TEXAS ARBITRATION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 09-10355 Document: 00511232038 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/13/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D September 13, 2010
More informationAugust 30, A. Introduction
August 30, 2013 The New Jersey Supreme Court Limits The Use Of Equitable Estoppel As A Basis To Compel Arbitration Of Claims Against A Person That Is Not A Signatory To An Arbitration Agreement A. Introduction
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA HHH MOTORS, LLP, D/B/A HYUNDAI OF ORANGE PARK, F/K/A HHH MOTORS, LTD., D/B/A HYUNDAI OF ORANGE PARK, CASE NO. 1D13-4397 Appellant, v. JENNY
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
NO. 16-95 In the Supreme Court of the United States J & K ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INCORPORATED; KIMBERLY N. MEYERS, v Petitioners, NEFFERTITI ROBINSON, Individually and on Behalf of those Similarly
More informationGENERAL ARBITRATION RULES AND PROCEDURES Revised March 15, 2016 Copyright by CDRS 2016 all rights reserved
RESOLUTION SERVICES CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES, LLC SPECIALIZING IN MEDIATION & ARBITRATION & DISPUTE REVIEW BOARDS PO BOX 8029 Santa Fe, NM 87504 New Mexico: 505-473-7733 Toll Free: 888-930-0011
More informationUnited States Supreme Court Considering A California Appellate Court Opinion Invalidating A Class Action Arbitration Waiver
United States Supreme Court Considering A California Appellate Court Opinion Invalidating A Class Action Arbitration Waiver By: Roland C. Goss August 31, 2015 On October 6, 2015, the second day of this
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 15-1620 Cellular Sales of Missouri, LLC lllllllllllllllllllllpetitioner v. National Labor Relations Board lllllllllllllllllllllrespondent ------------------------------
More informationCase 3:09-cv M Document 32 Filed 04/15/2009 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:09-cv-00217-M Document 32 Filed 04/15/2009 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CATHRYN ELAINE HARRIS et al., Plaintiffs, v. BLOCKBUSTER INC.,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 10-0155 444444444444 IN RE SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL AND SCI TEXAS FUNERAL SERVICES, INC. D/B/A MAGIC VALLEY MEMORIAL GARDENS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 08-0238 444444444444 IN RE INTERNATIONAL PROFIT ASSOCIATES, INC.; INTERNATIONAL TAX ADVISORS, INC.; AND IPA ADVISORY AND INTERMEDIARY SERVICES, LLC, RELATORS
More informationNinth Circuit Denies Insurer's Gamble on Vacatur in Nevada
Arbitration Law Review Volume 3 Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation Article 18 7-1-2011 Ninth Circuit Denies Insurer's Gamble on Vacatur in Nevada Emma M. Kline Follow this and additional works at: http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/arbitrationlawreview
More informationCase 0:13-cv JIC Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/07/2013 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:13-cv-60066-JIC Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/07/2013 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 13-60066-CIV-COHN-SELTZER ABRAHAM INETIANBOR Plaintiff,
More informationIMPORTANT NOTICE...3 INTRODUCTION...4. Standard Arbitration Clause...5. Administrative Fees...5 HEALTHCARE PAYOR PROVIDER RULES -- REGULAR TRACK...
AAA Healthcare Payor Provider Arbitration Rules Effective Date: January 31, 2011 To access the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures with the previous versions of Fee Schedules, visit
More informationCountry Author: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
Country Author: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP The Legal 500 & The In-House Lawyer Comparative Legal Guide United States: Arbitration This country-specific Q&A provides an overview of the legal framework
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 116,907 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. JUSTIN GARBERG and TREVOR GARBERG, Appellees,
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 116,907 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS JUSTIN GARBERG and TREVOR GARBERG, Appellees, v. ADVANTAGE SALES & MARKETING, LLC, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION
More informationCase 2:17-cv DB Document 48 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:17-cv-00207-DB Document 48 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION HOMELAND MUNITIONS, LLC, BIRKEN STARTREE HOLDINGS, CORP., KILO CHARLIE,
More informationEmployment Arbitration i Agreements Crafting Enforceable Arbitration Clauses and Successfully Navigating the ADR Process
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Employment Arbitration i Agreements Crafting Enforceable Arbitration Clauses and Successfully Navigating the ADR Process WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2011
More informationArbitration vs. Litigation
Arbitration vs. Litigation Prepared and Presented by: Steve Williams CHAPTER X ARBITRATION vs. LITIGATION Most owners and contractors want to build jobs, not argue about them. But, as most owners and contractors
More informationCase 1:16-cv GJQ-PJG ECF No. 106 filed 08/28/17 PageID.794 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:16-cv-00100-GJQ-PJG ECF No. 106 filed 08/28/17 PageID.794 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TIERRA VERDE ESCAPE, LLC, TOW DEVELOPMENT,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 7:15-cv LSC.
Case: 16-14519 Date Filed: 02/27/2017 Page: 1 of 13 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-14519 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 7:15-cv-02350-LSC
More informationCase 3:16-cv L Document 9 Filed 10/27/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID 48 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:16-cv-02430-L Document 9 Filed 10/27/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID 48 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SHEBA COWSETTE, Plaintiff, V. No. 3:16-cv-2430-L FEDERAL
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Freaner v. Lutteroth Valle et al Doc. 1 ARIEL FREANER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO. CV1 JLS (MDD) 1 1 vs. Plaintiff, ENRIQUE MARTIN LUTTEROTH VALLE, an individual;
More informationAAA Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex, Commercial Disputes)
APPENDIX 4 AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex, Commercial Disputes) Commercial Mediation Procedures M-1. Agreement of Parties Whenever, by
More informationJurisdiction, Procedure, and the Arbitrator s Role
Chapter 2 Jurisdiction, Procedure, and the Arbitrator s Role 2-1 JURISDICTION AND THE ARBITRATOR S MINDSET 2-1:1 The Authority to Arbitrate Arbitration is a consensual process. The source of the arbitrator
More informationCase 1:15-cv LEK-KJM Document 22 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 458 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
Case 1:15-cv-00481-LEK-KJM Document 22 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 458 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII NELSON BALBERDI, vs. Plaintiff, FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM,
More informationSonic-Denver T, Inc., d/b/a Mountain States Toyota, and American Arbitration Association, Inc., JUDGMENT AFFIRMED
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 10CA0275 Adams County District Court No. 09CV500 Honorable Katherine R. Delgado, Judge Ken Medina, Milton Rosas, and George Sourial, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before LUCERO, BACHARACH, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 8, 2015 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. Plaintiff - Appellee,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:17-cv-08503-PSG-GJS Document 62 Filed 09/05/18 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:844 Present: The Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, United States District Judge Wendy Hernandez Deputy Clerk Attorneys Present for
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-0-jfw-e Document 0 Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 JAVIER QUIROZ, vs. Plaintiff, CAVALRY SPV I, LLC, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. :-cv-0-jfw-e
More informationCase 2:17-cv JP Document 76-1 Filed 06/01/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : : :
Case 217-cv-03232-JP Document 76-1 Filed 06/01/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. NELSON, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, v. NO. 17-3232 DAVID
More informationCourt of Appeals. First District of Texas
Opinion issued July 12, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-13-00204-CV IN RE MOODY NATIONAL KIRBY HOUSTON S, LLC, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
More informationARBITRATION RULES AND PROCEDURES July 1, 2015 Copyright by CDRS 2013 all rights reserved
RESOLUTION SERVICES CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES, LLC SPECIALIZING IN MEDIATION & ARBITRATION & DISPUTE REVIEW BOARDS PO BOX 8029 Santa Fe, NM 87504 New Mexico: 505-473-7733 Toll Free: 888-930-0011
More informationEthical Issues Arising in Alternative Dispute Resolution
Ethical Issues Arising in Alternative Dispute Resolution Maxine Aaronson Attorney at Law Dallas, TX David A. Conrad Office of Chief Counsel Denver, CO Paul L.B. McKenney Varnum LLP Novi, MI Hon. Peter
More informationTHE PHI KAPPA TAU FRATERNITY CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN AND RULES
CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN AND RULES CLAIM AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PLAN 1. Purpose and Construction The Plan is designed to provide for the quick, fair, accessible, and inexpensive resolution of
More informationAPPEALS OF CONFIRMATION ORDERS: IS THE DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE MOOTNESS MOOT?
APPEALS OF CONFIRMATION ORDERS: IS THE DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE MOOTNESS MOOT? PRESENTED TO THE BBA BY MARIA ELLENA CHAVEZ-RUARK AT SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP NOVEMBER 9, 2017 I. About the Doctrine A.
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 17 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THOMAS ZABOROWSKI; VANESSA BALDINI; KIM DALE; NANCY PADDOCK; MARIA
More informationCase: 5:17-cv SL Doc #: 33 Filed: 11/06/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 228 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 5:17-cv-00220-SL Doc #: 33 Filed: 11/06/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 228 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JARROD PYLE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
More informationCase 2:18-cv RLR Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/06/2019 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 2:18-cv-14419-RLR Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/06/2019 Page 1 of 7 GEICO MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., v. Plaintiffs, TREASURE COAST MARITIME, INC., doing business as SEA TOW TREASURE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC ALEXANDER L. KAPLAN, et al., Petitioners, vs. KIMBALL HILL HOMES FLORIDA, INC.,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC06-74 ALEXANDER L. KAPLAN, et al., Petitioners, vs. KIMBALL HILL HOMES FLORIDA, INC., Respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 10-10172 Document: 00513015487 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/22/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT CHESTER SHANE MCVAY, Plaintiff - Appellant United States Court of Appeals
More informationArbitration in the Supreme Court: Dire Results, Dire Predictions, Or Limited Holdings?
Arbitration in the Supreme Court: Dire Results, Dire Predictions, Or Limited Holdings? Two cases decided in 2010, and one decision which will be issued in 2011, may substantially affect court involvement
More informationNABORS INDUSTRIES, INC. HUMAN RESOURCES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL
SUBJECT EMPLOYEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM SECTION MISCELLANEOUS NUMBER PAGE - 1 of 13 EFFECTIVE DATE - SUPERCEDES ISSUE January 1, 2002 DATED - May 1, 1998 1. Purpose and Construction The Program is
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. CV T
[PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 05-11556 D.C. Docket No. CV-05-00530-T THERESA MARIE SCHINDLER SCHIAVO, incapacitated ex rel, Robert Schindler and Mary Schindler,
More informationManifest' Destiny: The Fate of the 'Manifest Disregard of the Law' Doctrine After Hall Street v. Mattel
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law Volume 3 Issue 2 Article 5 4-20-2010 Manifest' Destiny: The Fate of the 'Manifest Disregard of the Law' Doctrine After Hall Street v. Mattel Karly A.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KAREN MACKALL, v. Plaintiff, HEALTHSOURCE GLOBAL STAFFING, INC., Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-who ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION Re:
More information