Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1473882
 
 

Footnotes (112)



 


 



Hall Street, Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards, and Federal Preemption


Nicholas R. Weiskopf


St. John's University - School of Law

Matthew S. Mulqueen


St. John's University - School of Law

September, 15 2009

St. John's Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-0177

Abstract:     
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Hall Street Associates L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. resolved an important conflict amongst the Circuits as to whether parties could contractually expand the scope of judicial review of awards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). While the Court held that such attempts were impermissible because the FAA's bases to vacate or modify awards, however narrow, were "exclusive," its opinion nonetheless raised more questions than it answered.

One such issue was what was to become of "manifest disregard," a judicially created ground to refuse confirmation intended to cover those unusual situations where arbitrators reached wholly bizarre results based on seemingly purposeful departures from basic rules of law. "Manifest disregard" is not referenced as such by the FAA, but, perhaps said the Court, it was nothing more than a reference to the sort of "abuse" of arbitral power which was specified in the FAA as a basis to refuse confirmation. This was to provoke a split commentary as to whether "manifest disregard" was still with us.

The second such issue was raised by the Court's reference to the latitude parties might have to circumvent the FAA's review restrictions by arranging for review pursuant to state statute or even common law. Would review really be broader under these rubrics, and how would parties to an FAA case escape its post-award provisions, particularly given principles of preemption. Could a case be an FAA case for some purposes, but not for purposes of confirmation.

This article deals with the issues just identified, and also traces early attempts by lower federal and state courts to intuit the Supreme Court's intentions in raising, but not answering them.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 26

working papers series





Download This Paper

Date posted: September 15, 2009  

Suggested Citation

Weiskopf, Nicholas R. and Mulqueen, Matthew S., Hall Street, Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards, and Federal Preemption (September, 15 2009). St. John's Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-0177. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1473882 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1473882

Contact Information

Nicholas R. Weiskopf (Contact Author)
St. John's University - School of Law ( email )
8000 Utopia Parkway
Jamaica, NY 11439
United States
Matthew S. Mulqueen
St. John's University - School of Law ( email )
8000 Utopia Parkway
Jamaica, NY 11439
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 661
Downloads: 136
Download Rank: 126,485
Footnotes:  112

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.297 seconds