Arbitration agreements have enjoyed privileged status among their contractual peers for nearly four decades now. Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court announced in Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corporation (1983) that the Federal Arbitration Act embodies “a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements,” those hoping to avoid the uncertainty and publicity of resolving legal claims in court have opted to divert more and more of their most contentious cases to the more predictable, private world of arbitration.

Indeed, a 2018 study found that more than half of all nonunion, private-sector employers require their employees to arbitrate all employment-related claims as a condition of their employment. And for the most part, the court has been quite accommodating. But that might finally be changing.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]