In a case before it this term, the U.S. Supreme Court will face the important task of reconciling the two fundamental policies underlying the nation’s arbitration system and determining which one should take precedence: freedom of contract, or efficient dispute resolution.
The question arises in a relatively little-noticed case, Hall Street Assocs. LLC v. Mattel Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2875 (No. 06-989 2007), in which the Court will address a split of authority on the enforceability of contractual provisions expanding the standard of review that federal courts may apply to arbitration awards. The U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals are divided on the issue, and amicus briefs have been submitted both in favor of and against the contractual expansion of judicial review. See Marcia Coyle, “Justices take a critical look at arbitration,” The National Law Journal, Oct. 29 at 1.
This content has been archived.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?
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
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]