For the second time in two years, the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California law (the “McGill Rule”) which invalidates arbitration agreements that waive the right of consumers to seek public injunctive relief. This time, however, there are changed circumstances that increase the odds that the Court will grant review of this critically important arbitration issue.
Earlier, in June 2020, the Court denied two petitions for certiorari that presented the same FAA preemption issue. We reported on those cases extensively and filed an amicus brief on behalf of the American Bankers Association and the Consumer Bankers Association in support of the petitioners. Those cases arose from Ninth Circuit opinions which held that the FAA does not preempt the McGill Rule
Read the complete story here.
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Prof. David Horton of the University of California - Davis School of Law about infinite arbitration clauses. https://youtu.be/SI2f3ubCytc
By David Horton, Amy SchmitzThis week, UNCITRAL Working Group III will consider the Draft Arbitrator Code of Conduct. They will be looking at proposed Article 3(2)(a), pursuant to which the obligation to remain independent and...
By Katherine SimpsonThis article first appeared on Securities Arbitration Alert, here. Just a month out from oral argument, Servotronics has notified the Court that it is dismissing its Certiorari Petition. That leaves Badgerow v. Walters, No....
By George Friedman
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.