Arbitration Law's Separability Doctrine After Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna
Stephen J. Ware
University of Kansas - School of Law
Nevada Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 107, 2007
The recent case of Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, is only the second Supreme Court decision applying the separability doctrine and it comes nearly forty years after the Court's first separability decision, Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Manufacturing Co. Arbitration's tremendous growth during those forty years - and the arrival of Buckeye - make this an opportune time to assess the current state of the separability doctrine. In doing that, this Article will analyze Prima Paint and Buckeye and discuss the separability issues they leave unresolved. Finally, this Article will critique the separability doctrine and call for its repeal by Congress.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 28Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: October 3, 2007 ; Last revised: February 24, 2008
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.406 seconds