Arbitration News
April 16, 2020:
Houston First Court of Appeals, in an employment dispute, reverses denial of a motion to compel arbitration, finding the dispute arbitrable, even though the employer never signed the arbitration agreement. SK Plymouth v. Simmons, No. 01-19-00433-CV (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 16, 2020, no pet. h.).
April 7, 2020:
Fifth Circuit affirms dismissal of an action against the AAA and two arbitrators, holding that section 10 of the FAA provides the exclusive remedy for complaints of arbitrator bias or corruption. Tex. Brine Co. v. Am. Arbitration Ass'n, No. 18-31184 (5th Cir. Apr. 7, 2020).
April 24, 2019:
Supreme Court holds that an arbitration agreement that is ambiguous about class arbitration does not authorize class arbitration, rejecting application of a California contract construction rule (contra proferentem -- a contract should be construed against the drafter) that would lead to a contrary result. Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, No. 17-988, 2019 WL 1780275 (Apr. 24, 2019).
January 8, 2019:
Supreme Court resolves a split in the circuits, holding that courts must give effect to parties' agreement that an arbitrator, and not a court, should decide gateway questions of arbitrability. Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 524 (2019).
May 21, 2018:
Supreme Court affirms the validity of arbitration provisions in employment agreements that require individual arbitration of claims (no class treatment), rejecting challenges based on the savings clause in the FAA and the statutory protection for "concerted activities" in the NLRA. Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018).
May 11, 2018:
Texas Supreme Court holds that whether the claim of a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement must be arbitrated, as opposed to litigated, is a gateway matter that a trial court, not the arbitrator, must determine. Jody James Farms, JV v. Altman Group, 547 S.W.3d 624 (Tex. 2018).
December 18, 2017:
Dallas Court of Appeals affirms dismissal of a motion to vacate an arbitration award because the movant failed properly to serve the motion within the statutory three-month limitaions period. Craig v. Southwest Securities, Inc., No. 05-16-01378-CV, 2017 WL 6503213 (Tex. App. -- Dallas, Dec. 18, 2017) (unpublished).
May 15, 2017:
Supreme Court holds that the FAA invalidates a Kentucky rule requiring that, for a power of attorney to authorize an agent to enter into an arbitration agreement on behalf of the principal, the power of attorney must expressly state that the agent has the power to waive the principal's rights of access to the courts and trial by jury. Kindred Nursing Ctrs. Ltd. P'ship v. Clark, 137 S. Ct. 1421 (2017).
March 2017:
Economic research firm quantifies time and cost benefits of arbitration versus litigation in federal court.
May 20, 2016:
Texas Supreme Court holds that under the TAA the grounds for vacatur enumerated in the statute are exclusive and manifest disregard of the law is no longer available as a vacatur ground, thus resolving, as a matter of state law, an issue on which the federal circuit courts of appeals (construing the FAA) are split. Hoskins v. Hoskins, 497 S.W.3d 490 (Tex 2016).
March 2, 2016:
Fifth Circuit holds that an arbitration agreement in an employee handbook is unenforceable because it did not require that the employer provide advance notice to the employee before terminating the arbitration agreement. Nelson v. Watch House International, L.L.C., 815 F.3d 190 (5th Cir. 2016).
June 26, 2015:
Texas Supreme Court finds that an arbitration provision in an attorney-client employment contract is enforceable, concluding that the provision is not unconscionable, does not violate public policy, and is not illusory. Royston, Rayzor, Vickery & Williams, LLP v. Francisco "Frank" Lopez, 467 S.W.3d 494 (Tex. 2015).
May 23, 2014:
Texas Supreme Court vacates a $125 million arbitration award for evident partiality. Tenaska Energy, Inc. v. Ponderosa Pine Energy, LLC, 437 S.W.3d 518 (Tex. 2014).
November 26, 2012:
Supreme Court holds than an arbitrator, not a court, should decide a challenge to the overall validity of a contract containing an arbitration clause when the arbitration clause, standing alone, is valid. Nitro-Lift Techs., L.L.C. v. Howard, 568 U.S. 17 (2012).
