Ali Khan, Professor of Law at Washburn University School of Law, has published an interesting article entitled, Arbitral Autonomy, Louisiana Law Review, Vol. 74, No. 2, 2013. In his paper, Professor Khan discusses the need to minimize court challenges to arbitration in order to successfully achieve arbitral autonomy.
Here is the abstract:
This Article presents concrete proposals to amend the current arbitration law for minimizing court intervention into arbitration proceedings and enforcement...
California’s appellate courts have had a strained relationship with the U.S. Supreme Court when it comes to enforcement of the FAA in the last few years. Illustrative of this tension is a recent decision captioned Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, No. S174475 (Cal. Oct. 17, 2013) (“Sonic II”). The Court in Sonic II was instructed by the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling in Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, 51 Cal. 4th 659 (2011) (“Sonic I”), which invalidated an arbitration...
Now that we know the Supreme Court is not going to be addressing non-signatories’ ability to compel arbitration this term (at least not in the Toyota case), we can take a moment to look at what lower courts are doing with that issue. In short, the trend is for courts to clarify that it is very difficult for defendants who do not have an arbitration agreement with the plaintiff (non-signatories) to use equitable estoppel to compel arbitration of the plaintiff’s claims based on the plaintiff’s...
You hear more about Lena Dunham than you expect, given the audience for “Girls”, right? (Read this article for more.) The same is true, or should be true, for the contract defense of illusoriness. After decades of disuse, it is popping up more and more often as a defense to the enforcement of arbitration clauses (like in New Mexico and the Fifth Circuit), and therefore qualifies as the “it girl” of arbitration law. Just last week, the Sixth Circuit issued a new decision, affirming...
The 5th Circuit rarely lets parties out of contracts that mandate that their disputes be settled through binding arbitration. That could turn out to be true even for the federally appointed receiver who's seeking to recover the allegedly fraudulently transferred assets of convicted financier R. Allen Stanford and his related companies.
The Fourth Circuit held that class-action waivers in otherwise valid arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The court held that the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S.Ct. 1740 (2011), “plainly prohibited” the courts from invalidating an otherwise valid arbitration agreement due to a class-action waiver. As a result, it is error to hold that a class-action waiver in an arbitration agreement is unconscionable.
The 5th Circuit rarely lets parties out of contracts that mandate that their disputes be settled through binding arbitration. That could turn out to be true even for the federally appointed receiver who's seeking to recover the allegedly fraudulently transferred assets of convicted financier R. Allen Stanford and his related companies.