23 Cited authorities

  1. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion

    563 U.S. 333 (2011)   Cited 3,753 times   601 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a ban on collective-action waivers in those contracts worked to "disfavor arbitration"
  2. Moses H. Cone Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp.

    460 U.S. 1 (1983)   Cited 11,902 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Holding stay order appealable under § 1291 where it put the litigant "effectively out of court," and "surrender[ed] jurisdiction of a federal suit to a state court"
  3. Mitsubishi Motors v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth

    473 U.S. 614 (1985)   Cited 4,235 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act emphatically favors arbitration
  4. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.

    500 U.S. 20 (1991)   Cited 3,024 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim arising under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (1994 ed.), may be subject to compulsory arbitration
  5. EPIC Sys. Corp. v. Lewis

    138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018)   Cited 911 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under Concepcion , "courts may not allow a contract defense to reshape traditional individualized arbitration" and "a rule seeking to declare individualized arbitration proceedings off limits" is preempted by the FAA
  6. Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams

    532 U.S. 105 (2001)   Cited 1,536 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "any other class of workers engaged in ... commerce," following the specific examples of seamen and railroad employees, includes only "transportation workers," because construing it to include all other workers "fails to give independent effect to the statute’s enumeration of the specific categories of workers" that precede it
  7. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Waffle House, Inc.

    534 U.S. 279 (2002)   Cited 1,486 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a private arbitration agreement between an employee and an employer could not bind a nonparty governmental agency, the EEOC, and thus that the agreement—which was enforceable against the employee under the Federal Arbitration Act—did not limit the types of remedies the agency could seek in an enforcement action it initiated under Title VII
  8. Southland Corp. v. Keating

    465 U.S. 1 (1984)   Cited 1,869 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that through the FAA, "Congress intended to foreclose state legislative attempts to undercut the enforceability of arbitration agreements"
  9. Compucredit Corp. v. Greenwood

    565 U.S. 95 (2012)   Cited 266 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that contract “parties remain free to specify” their choice of judicial forum “so long as the guarantee ” of the Act “is preserved.”
  10. KPMG LLP v. Cocchi

    565 U.S. 18 (2011)   Cited 222 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FAA has been “interpreted to require that if a dispute presents multiple claims, some arbitrable and some not, the former must be sent to arbitration even if this will lead to piecemeal litigation”
  11. Section 2 - Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate

    9 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 10,874 times   117 Legal Analyses
    Granting federal jurisdiction where there is "a transaction involving [interstate] commerce"
  12. Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,279 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity
  13. Section 500.11 - Alternative procedure for selected appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.11   Cited 539 times

    (a) On its own motion, the court may review selected appeals by an alternative procedure. Such appeals shall be determined on the intermediate appellate court record or appendix and briefs, the writings in the courts below and additional letter submissions on the merits. The clerk of the court shall notify all parties by letter when an appeal has been selected for review pursuant to this section. Appellant may request such review in its preliminary appeal statement. Respondent may request such review