I have to confess something: I just returned from sunny California where I attended an excellent arbitrator training course put on by the American Arbitration Association and run by Dana Welch and Michael Powell! If you have an opportunity to take a course from either of them, I highly recommend it.
And, as it so
I can’t believe we’re more than a week into August! I don’t know about you, but I feel like I’m going to have to say goodbye to summer too soon. I love fall, so maybe that’s not so bad?
Anyway, speaking of farewells, this week we get a back-to-the-basics refresher from the Eleventh Circuit on
Liz has written before about the ways that state courts sometimes try to resist SCOTUS’s love affair with arbitration. Resistance can come in many and varying forms, some more subtle than others.
One persistent source of confusion in arbitration law, and thus a locus for resistance, centers on delegation clauses. As a quick refresher, in
Arbitration Nation is seven years old, and has 330 posts under its belt (and no seven year itch). Hip hip hooray! One of those posts is a perennial favorite, coming up over and over in search results: When Should You Choose JAMS, AAA or CPR Rules? Because that comparison is five years old, we
If you are a party that wants courts to rigidly enforce delegation clauses – sending questions about even the validity of the agreement to arbitration – then you will appreciate a new decision from the Tenth Circuit. In Belnap v. Iasis Healthcare, __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 56277 (10th Cir. Jan. 5, 2017),
Albert Einstein supposedly once said “you have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anyone else.” In arbitration, that means figuring out which organizations’ rules are best suited for your arbitration clause. This post is designed to help drafters make that decision by giving a quick and