This is my 290th post at ArbitrationNation and today I celebrate six years of blogging. Woo hoo — that’s longer than most celebrity marriages! In honor of the occasion, here are updates on six of the hottest issues in arbitration law so far this year.
In January of 2016, SCOTUS granted review of an arbitration case from Hawaii, but summarily vacated and remanded it without analysis. (Unless you consider “Please read DIRECTV” substantive analysis.) Here’s the risk of that course of action: Hawaii can refuse to change its mind.
Last month, in Narayan v. The Ritz-Carlton Development Co., 2017
On October 28, the Supreme Court granted a cert petition in a case in which the Kentucky Supreme Court refused to enforce arbitration agreements in nursing home agreements. (Kentucky recently topped my list of states hostile to arbitration precisely because of the language in the decision that will be reviewed…)
The Supreme Court of California this week enforced the arbitration agreement between an employee and employer. Yes, you read that right. While reputed to be reliably anti-arbitration, California’s highest court continues to provide evidence that it is tired of being reversed by SCOTUS * and is ready to follow federal precedent on the FAA.
In
Showing it will soldier on without Justice Scalia, the Supreme Court granted cert, vacated, and remanded an arbitration decision from West Virginia yesterday. Because this is the exact same treatment the Court gave a case from Hawaii’s highest court in January (and the same treatment I predicted, ahem), it suggests SCOTUS is trying to go
The actual and potential arbitration docket at the Supreme Court contracted in the last week due to three events.
First, SCOTUS made quick work of an appeal from the Hawaii Supreme Court. Remember when I predicted that the DIRECTV case was going to make it even harder for state courts to find arbitration agreements unenforceable
Just under the wire, SCOTUS released an arbitration opinion today, ensuring that 2015 would continue the string of years with cases interpreting the Federal Arbitration Act. In DIRECTV v. Imburgia, the Supreme Court found that California’s interpretation of an arbitration clause was preempted by the FAA. DIRECTV is a 6-3 decision, with Justice Kagan
2015 has been a dry spell in arbitration decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, but 2016 promises to be much more interesting. In addition to the California case being heard next week, SCOTUS just granted certiorari in another California-based arbitration decision. This one, MHN Government Services, Inc. v. Zaborowski, will review an unpublished 2-1
Just as I was beginning to worry that arbitration had fallen out of favor at the nation’s highest court… today the Supreme Court announced that it will hear the case of DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia during its October Term, an appeal from a California Court of Appeals. In DIRECTV, a case pitting Kirkland &
The U.S. Supreme Court has been knocking out blockbuster arbitration opinions annually in recent years. 2010? Stolt-Nielsen and Rent-a-Center. 2011? Concepcion. 2012? CompuCredit (Okay, that does not qualify as a blockbuster.) 2013? AmEx and Sutter. At this point, SCOTUS has accepted roughly half of the cases it will hear this year, and