Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 332: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 163: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 145: Listen and Learn -- Permissive Joinder and Required Joinder
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 263: Listen and Learn -- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 92: Listen and Learn -- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 72: Tackling a California Bar Exam Essay: Civil Procedure
In a highly anticipated ruling published last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in NextEra Energy v. Spain that U.S. district courts have jurisdiction to enforce arbitral awards issued in intra-EU...more
The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires federal courts to enforce agreements to arbitrate that impact interstate commerce. The FAA and its body of case law are binding on state courts and many states have adopted similar...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s arbitration award because the district court lacked proper subject matter jurisdiction, independent from the Federal Arbitration Act...more
In an 8-1 decision, the United States Supreme Court recently held in Badgerow v. Walters that federal courts may not examine the substance of arbitration disputes to establish federal question jurisdiction under Sections 9...more
On 31 March 2022, the United States Supreme Court in Badgerow v. Walters limited federal subject matter jurisdiction over post-arbitration award petitions under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) §§ 9 and 10. After years of...more
On March 31, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued an important decision regarding federal courts’ subject matter jurisdiction to confirm, vacate, or modify arbitral awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the Federal...more
Last week in Badgerow v. Walters, the United States Supreme Court held in an 8-1 decision that under the Federal Arbitration Act, a federal court cannot consider an underlying dispute to determine whether it has federal...more
On March 31, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Badgerow v. Walters, No 20-1143, addressing when federal courts have jurisdiction to rule on motions to confirm, modify, or vacate arbitration...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal courts cannot enforce or vacate arbitration awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., unless they have an independent...more
In a nearly unanimous opinion, the United States Supreme Court recently held in Badgerow v. Walters that a district court cannot “look through” to the underlying controversy in order to support jurisdiction to decide a motion...more
Our prior blog articles predicted that the outcome in Badgerow v. Walters, No. 20-1143, might turn on whether the plain text of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or its purposes would prevail. See our June 16 and Nov. 9, 2021...more
In a recent decision involving arbitration, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate a domestic arbitration award under Sections 9 and 10 of the Federal...more
In a little-noticed recent decision, a nearly-unanimous U.S. Supreme Court significantly narrowed the jurisdiction of the federal courts to confirm, vacate or modify arbitration awards under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)....more
On March 31, 2022, the US Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Badgerow v. Walters, No. 20-1143, ending a circuit split about when federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction to review domestic arbitration...more
Brett-Andrew Nelson filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award issued by the Sitcomm Arbitration Association. The award purported to award Nelson $500,000 from each of the four defendants based on their breach of an...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has now granted certiorari to decide if federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), Sections 9 and 10. 9 U.S.C. §§...more
The petitioner sought to confirm an arbitration award, which the respondent opposed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The respondent argued that the district court only had jurisdiction to confirm final arbitration...more
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently held as a matter of first impression that a district court properly looked to the substance of an underlying dispute in determining whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction over...more
In 2001, Del Monte International GmbH and Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. entered into an agreement for the production, packaging, and sale of MD-2 pineapples, a variety of pineapple that Del Monte had...more
As discussed in earlier posts, the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq., does not provide an independent basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction over federal court proceedings concerning domestic...more
Don’t try to confirm an arbitration award when there is still arbitration work to be done. Relying on Seventh Circuit precedent, the Northern District of Illinois concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to...more
Following arbitration, the parties filed cross-motions to confirm and vacate the arbitration award. The District Court for the Southern District of California issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed...more
The District of Minnesota issued several opinions this summer in a dispute between two insurance companies, Federated Mutual Insurance Co. (“Federated Mutual”) and Federated National Holding Co. (“Federated National”),...more
An ex parte proceeding in a U.S. court to “recognize,” “enforce,” or “confirm” an arbitration award against a foreign sovereign is improper. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a lengthy and instructive...more
The courts undoubtedly have the power to grant provisional remedies in aid of a pending arbitration – including temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, and attachments. As a recent Fifth Circuit decision...more