Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Corporate CounselorKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

The Federal Arbitration Act

By John Wilkinson
July 31, 2008

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Hall Street Associates, L. L. C. v. Mattel, Inc. (Slip Opinion, No. 06-989) had long been anticipated by the litigation and arbitration communities and has been the subject of extensive commentary and debate in the brief period since it was rendered. The issue (which had created a sharp conflict in the Circuits) was whether the standards for judicial review of arbitration awards, as set forth in Sections 9-11 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), could be contractually expanded by the arbitrating parties. More particularly, the question was whether parties could contract to inject traditional grounds for appeal into FAA arbitrations or whether they were limited to what was specifically set forth in Sections 9-11 of the FAA, e.g., 'evident partiality,' 'fraud,' 'corruption,' refusing to hear 'pertinent and material' evidence, and acts exceeding the powers of the arbitrator.

The Hall Street Court held that parties could not contractually expand the standards for judicial review in Sections 9-11 of the FAA. A likely, practical outgrowth of this ruling is that arbitrating parties will also be unable to contractually expand standards for judicial review under most if not all state arbitration statutes. This will make it more difficult for courts to overturn arbitration awards, and raises serious doubts about the continuing vitality of generally accepted decisions which hold that 'manifest disregard of the law' is a separate and distinct ground for challenging an arbitration award under the FAA.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.