41 Pages Posted: 30 Apr 2001
This article presents the results of a study of 106 decisions by the Supreme Court of Alabama from January 18, 1995 through July 9, 1999. The decisions are in the area of arbitration law and reveal the remarkably close correlation between a justice's votes on arbitration cases and his or her primary source or campaign funds. Justices whose election campaigns are funded by plaintiffs' lawyers oppose arbitration, whereas justices whose campaigns are funded by business favor arbitration. The correlation holds not just with regard to ideologically-charged doctrines, like unconscionability, but also with seemingly bland questions of contract formation, interpretation and waiver.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Ware, Stephen J., Money, Politics and Judicial Decisions: A Case Study of Arbitration Law in Alabama. Journal of Law & Politics, Vol. 15, No. 645, 1999. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=262579