3 Year-End Arbitration Lessons From Appellate Courts
This post has been viewed 2,437 times.
Before I can sum up 2015 in arbitration (next post!), I need to report on some new cases coming out of the federal and state appellate courts in recent weeks. Two are just good reminders of basic arbitration law, but the third addresses an interesting question of double recovery.
Our first “reminder” case comes from New York’s highest court. In Cusimano v. Schnurr, 2015 WL 8787554 (N.Y. Dec. 16, 2015), that court held that the Federal Arbitration Act applies, even to intrafamily transactions among New York residents (sing: “it’s a family affaaaair…”), and even when defendants argue their family business is “passive” and has no impact on interstate commerce. The court basically said family shmamily, look at the type of business you have and what it owns. “The idea that the intrafamilial nature of the agreements has some bearing on whether the FAA is applicable finds no support in the caselaw.” Instead, the fact that the family business owned commercial properties inside and outside New York was key. (But, the plaintiffs waived their right to arbitrate by litigating aggressively for a year.)
Read original articleTags:
