While the U.S. Supreme Court as recently as last month has affirmed its preference to enforce contractual arbitration clauses, a federal judge in Philadelphia questioned Wednesday whether that standard is impacted by professional ethics rules when the arbitration clause involves a law firm's client engagement letter.
In a hearing on whether the legal malpractice case of Sanford v. Bracewell & Giuliani should be stayed pending arbitration, U.S. District Judge Joel Slomsky of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania said the Federal Arbitration Act has been the subject of a number of U.S. Supreme Court and Third Circuit cases supporting the presumption in favor of arbitration. But those cases didn't involve law firms, Slomsky said.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
