Erie RR v Thompkins
In cases of diversity jurisdiction, federal court is to apply state law. Does FAA dislodge application of state statute or decisional law?
Bernhardt v Polygraph
SC took Erie-sensitive position, holding that FAA was federal procedural enactment. Read § 3 narrowly.
Robert Lawrence v Devonshire
2nd Cir. declared that FAA represented enactment of federal substantive law and was applicable to state and federal courts while being controlling in diversity cases.
Prima Paint v Flood/Conklin
1) separability
2) interstate commerce exists liberally
“Arbitrators should not be allowed to arbitrate legal issues”
J. Black dissent, Prima Paint
Citizens Bank v Alafabco
Wide and expansive view of interstate commerce
Moses Cone Memorial v Mercury
Court no longer questions whether FAA is procedural or substantive & recognizes that FAA is vehicle for creation of new federal rights.
Vaden v Discover
Applied “look-through” doctrine to compel arbitration to the underlying dispute to find SMJ
Southland v Keating
FAA is controlling law on arbitration, state legislatures must respect the FAA and not conflict
Dean Reynolds v Byrd
Courts should direct parties to arbitration on issues to which arbitration agreement has been signed
Intertwining Doctrine
Reynolds v Byrd; when fed claims are brought w/ state claims that have arbitration clause, claims are intertwined and federal courts have jx
Volt v Board of Trustees
Emphasis moved from protecting contractual right to arbitrate to enforcement of stipulated obligations (party autonomy)
Allied-Bruce Terminix v Dobson
FAA protection applied whenever federal law reached and pre-empts state law
“FAA is an edifice of the Court’s own creation”
J. O’Connor dissent, Allied Bruce Terminix
Drs. Assocs. v. Casarotto
confirms strength of federalization; state laws cannot single out arbitration agreements for discriminating treatment (RBG)
Buckeye Check Cashing
Separability; allows challenges to main contract to be decided by arbitrator
Preston v Ferrer
When party agrees to arbitrate, state laws lodging primary jurisdiction are superseded by the FAA
Mastrobuono v Sherson
- Contradicts reasoning in Volt
- Party choice as to state law only respected when choice of law fosters recourse to arbitration or when parties have expressly recognized state law contains restriction and expressly agree that restriction is applicable
First Options v Kaplan
-Courts have primary authority to resolve arbitrability question (standard of review)
Rent a Center
Court decides whether Kaplan delegation clause is a good contract or not (Scalia)
Kyocera v Prudential
Parties don’t have the right to include judicial review in agreement
Hall Street
Manifest disregard could be shorthand for “guilty of misconduct” or “exceeded their powers”
BG Group v Argentina
Arbitrators have the right to interpret the parties’ agreements
Howsam v Dean Reynolds
Procedural questions belong to the arbitrator
