US Supreme Court Continues Its Pro-Arbitration Approach
In late June, the U.S. Supreme Court issued back-to-back pro-arbitration decisions in two separate cases.
July 03, 2023 at 11:24 AM
15 minute read
In late June, the U.S. Supreme Court issued back-to-back pro-arbitration decisions in two separate cases. Coinbase v. Bielski, 599 U.S. __ (June 23, 2013) involved a disagreement between the parties at the beginning of the arbitration process about whether a dispute should be resolved in court or in arbitration. The court held that when a party appeals an interlocutory order denying a motion to compel arbitration, that appeal automatically stays the pending lawsuit. This means that even after a district court has ruled that a dispute should proceed as a lawsuit in the courts rather than in arbitration, a party seeking to arbitrate can put a pause on that lawsuit simply by appealing that ruling. Yegiazaryan v. Smagin, 599 U.S. __ (June 22, 2013) involved the end of the process, and concerned the enforcement of an international arbitration award. The court held that a foreign resident was not, by virtue of that status, precluded from relying on the RICO statute to enforce an international arbitration award in the United States. Because RICO provides for the recovery of treble damages and attorney fees, this decision gives a powerful weapon to those seeking to enforce international arbitral awards in the United States.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readPoll Workers Seek Contempt Against Rudy Giuliani, Alleging Continued Defamation
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Akin, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins Are First Texas Big Law Firms to Match Milbank Bonuses
- 2Walking a Minute in Your Adversary’s Shoes: Addressing the Issue of 'Naive Realism' at Mediation
- 3The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 4New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 5Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Office & Dragons
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