22 Cited authorities

Mitsubishi Motors v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth
473 U.S. 614 (1985) Cited 4,232 times 44 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Act emphatically favors arbitration
Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Waffle House, Inc.
534 U.S. 279 (2002) Cited 1,485 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
The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.
407 U.S. 1 (1972) Cited 4,534 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts should enforce a choice-of-law clause when it is part of a "freely negotiated private international agreement"
Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
431 U.S. 720 (1977) Cited 1,286 times 61 Legal Analyses
Holding that indirect purchasers cannot recover damages under federal antitrust law
Holland Am. Line Inc. v. Wärtsilä N. Am., Inc.
485 F.3d 450 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 494 times
Holding that forum selection clauses applied to non-signatories because larger contract involved transactions that included non-signatories
Simula, Inc. v. Autoliv, Inc.
175 F.3d 716 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 600 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that disputes “need only touch matters covered by the contract containing the arbitration clause and all doubts are to be resolved in favor of arbitrability”
United States v. Seckinger
397 U.S. 203 (1970) Cited 389 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that ambiguous contractual provisions should be construed against the drafter, even if the drafter is the government
Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci Am., Inc.
858 F.2d 509 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 730 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding tort claims were covered by a forum-selection clause because resolution of the tort claims required interpretation of the parties' contract
Klamath Water Users Pro. Ass'n. v. Patterson
204 F.3d 1206 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 379 times
Holding that federal law controls the interpretation of a contract entered into pursuant to federal law when the United States is a party
Comer v. Micor, Inc.
436 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2006) Cited 292 times
Holding that a plaintiff who brought claims that were not based on agreements containing arbitration clauses did not "knowingly exploit" the agreements containing the arbitration clauses

MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation

22 Cited authorities

Holding that the Act emphatically favors arbitration

Holding that courts should enforce a choice-of-law clause when it is part of a "freely negotiated private international agreement"

Holding that indirect purchasers cannot recover damages under federal antitrust law

Holding that forum selection clauses applied to non-signatories because larger contract involved transactions that included non-signatories

Holding that disputes “need only touch matters covered by the contract containing the arbitration clause and all doubts are to be resolved in favor of arbitrability”

Holding that ambiguous contractual provisions should be construed against the drafter, even if the drafter is the government

Holding tort claims were covered by a forum-selection clause because resolution of the tort claims required interpretation of the parties' contract

Holding that federal law controls the interpretation of a contract entered into pursuant to federal law when the United States is a party

Holding that a plaintiff who brought claims that were not based on agreements containing arbitration clauses did not "knowingly exploit" the agreements containing the arbitration clauses