Cases Flashcards

1
Q

Erie RR v Thompkins

A

In cases of diversity jurisdiction, federal court is to apply state law. Does FAA dislodge application of state statute or decisional law?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Bernhardt v Polygraph

A

SC took Erie-sensitive position, holding that FAA was federal procedural enactment. Read § 3 narrowly.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Robert Lawrence v Devonshire

A

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.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Prima Paint v Flood/Conklin

A

1) separability

2) interstate commerce exists liberally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

“Arbitrators should not be allowed to arbitrate legal issues”

A

J. Black dissent, Prima Paint

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Citizens Bank v Alafabco

A

Wide and expansive view of interstate commerce

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Moses Cone Memorial v Mercury

A

Court no longer questions whether FAA is procedural or substantive & recognizes that FAA is vehicle for creation of new federal rights.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Vaden v Discover

A

Applied “look-through” doctrine to compel arbitration to the underlying dispute to find SMJ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Southland v Keating

A

FAA is controlling law on arbitration, state legislatures must respect the FAA and not conflict

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Dean Reynolds v Byrd

A

Courts should direct parties to arbitration on issues to which arbitration agreement has been signed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Intertwining Doctrine

A

Reynolds v Byrd; when fed claims are brought w/ state claims that have arbitration clause, claims are intertwined and federal courts have jx

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Volt v Board of Trustees

A

Emphasis moved from protecting contractual right to arbitrate to enforcement of stipulated obligations (party autonomy)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Allied-Bruce Terminix v Dobson

A

FAA protection applied whenever federal law reached and pre-empts state law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

“FAA is an edifice of the Court’s own creation”

A

J. O’Connor dissent, Allied Bruce Terminix

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Drs. Assocs. v. Casarotto

A

confirms strength of federalization; state laws cannot single out arbitration agreements for discriminating treatment (RBG)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Buckeye Check Cashing

A

Separability; allows challenges to main contract to be decided by arbitrator

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Preston v Ferrer

A

When party agrees to arbitrate, state laws lodging primary jurisdiction are superseded by the FAA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Mastrobuono v Sherson

A
  • 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
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

First Options v Kaplan

A

-Courts have primary authority to resolve arbitrability question (standard of review)

20
Q

Rent a Center

A

Court decides whether Kaplan delegation clause is a good contract or not (Scalia)

21
Q

Kyocera v Prudential

A

Parties don’t have the right to include judicial review in agreement

22
Q

Hall Street

A

Manifest disregard could be shorthand for “guilty of misconduct” or “exceeded their powers”

23
Q

BG Group v Argentina

A

Arbitrators have the right to interpret the parties’ agreements

24
Q

Howsam v Dean Reynolds

A

Procedural questions belong to the arbitrator

25
Q

Green Tree v Bazzle

A
  • extended reach of arbitrators discretion
  • limited role of courts
  • enhanced systematic autonomy of arbitration
26
Q

Stolt Nielson v Animal Feeds

A

anti-arbitration case, vacated arbitral award after going into merits review (Sutter)

27
Q

In re Statewide Realty Co

A

Recourse to arbitration in bankruptcy context can be defeated by express party agreement

28
Q

Mintze v American General

A

Recourse to arbitration disallowed only if it jeopardizes objectives of bankruptcy code

29
Q

MBNA Bank v Hills

A

Bankruptcy court must enforce arbitration

30
Q

Mitsubishi

A
  • Anti-trust dispute was arbitral

- International courts are ineffective

31
Q

Mouton v Metropolitan Life Ins.

A

Any doubts concerning scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in favor of arbitration, Title VII arbitrable

32
Q

14 Penn Plaza

A

Title VII arbitrable

33
Q

Randolph v Green Tree

A

Truth in lending claim inarbitrable

34
Q

McGarran Ferguson Act

A

Insurance contracts can involve interstate commerce and include arbitration agreements

35
Q

Wilko v Swan

A

Arbitration agreement violated the 1933 Securities Act (Jackson concurrence–post dispute arbitration should be allowed)

36
Q

Shearson v McMahon

A

Claims under exchange act and RICO statute could be submitted to arbitration

37
Q

Rodriguez v Shearson

A

Claims under Securities Act are arbitrable, overruling Wilko

38
Q

Aames v Sharpe

A

carve out exception, the fact that lender retains option to litigate while borrower must litigate all claims does not make arbitration unenforceable

39
Q

AT&T v Concepcion

A

Class action waivers are lawful part of bargaining power and California Bank Rule is preempted by FAA

40
Q

Alexander v Gardner-Denver

A

Employee can either participate in arbitration and then file suit, or take Title VII claim directly to court

41
Q

Gilmer v Interstate

A
  • mere inequality of bargaining power not enough

- age discrimination arbitrable

42
Q

Remmy v Painwebber

A

Judicial review must be limited

43
Q

Rodriguez v Prudential

A

errors made re: application of the law are not proper basis for vacatur of arbitral awards

44
Q

Halligan v Piper

A

Manifest disregard more flexible; can include possible disregard of evidence presented during proceedings

45
Q

Halligan v Piper

A

Manifest disregard more flexible; can include possible disregard of evidence presented during proceedings

46
Q

Wallace v Buttar

A

manifest disregard unavailable if a barely colorable justification for result can be found

47
Q

Hall Street Assocs. v Mattel

A

Manifest disregard is just a phrase referring to the FAA 10(a)(3) and (4)