Kavanaugh's First Opinion Is Unanimous Win for Arbitration
The decision, a win for Williams & Connolly's Kannon Shanmugam, came in the first of three arbitration cases before the Supreme Court this term.
January 08, 2019 at 10:55 AM
3 minute read
In his first majority opinion as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, Brett Kavanaugh on Tuesday issued a pro-arbitration decision that won unanimous support from his new colleagues.
In the case Henry Schein v. Archer and White Sales, the issue was whether the Federal Arbitration Act permits a court to decline to enforce an agreement that delegates arbitrability questions to an arbitrator, if the court finds the arbitrability claim “wholly groundless.”
Kavanaugh said no, vacating a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
“The Act does not contain a 'wholly groundless' exception,” Kavanaugh wrote, “and we are not at liberty to rewrite the statute passed by Congress and signed by the president. When the parties' contract delegates the arbitrability question to an arbitrator, the courts must respect the parties' decision as embodied in the contract.”
The decision came in the first of three arbitration cases before the Supreme Court this term.
During oral argument in late October, some liberal justices expressed dissatisfaction with that outcome. Justice Stephen Breyer asked what would happen if the arbitration claim is “really weird.” He added, “I mean, you want to say no exception at all? He says my claim here is that a Martian told me to do it. OK?”
But the liberal justices joined in Kavanaugh's opinion nonetheless. It is customary for new justices to be assigned to write opinions in cases that are unanimous.
The decision was a win for Kannon Shanmugam of Williams & Connolly, who argued against Dan Geyser of Geyser PC. Shanmugam was also the winning lawyer in Justice Neil Gorsuch's maiden opinion in the 2017 case Henson v. Santander Consumer USA.
Kavanaugh's opinion was a terse 10 pages long, written in straightforward prose, and he began the opinion with a brief summary of the case and its outcome, which not all justices do.
Read the ruling in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales Inc.:
Read more:
Liberal Justices Push Back on Pro-Arbitration Arguments
Will the Supreme Court Further Limit Access to Justice?
Gorsuch's Maiden Opinion: Terse, Plain-Spoken and Text-Based
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLavish 'Lies' Led to Investors Being Fleeced in Nine-Figure International Crypto Scam
3 minute readSEC Puts Beat Down on Ex-Wrestling CEO Vince McMahon for Not Reporting Settlements
3 minute readDOJ Files Antitrust Suit to Block Amex GBT's Acquisition of Competitor
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250