Site Meter

Supreme Court Arbitration Rhetoric v. Reality and AT&T

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. royal lea says:

    what makes Stok & associates v Citibank worthy of review? Will the Court say prejudice is required for a waiver of arbitration even though prejudice is not required for any other contractual waiver, further detatching arbitration agreements from all other contracts?

  2. Lawrence Cunningham says:

    royal lea: Excellent point.

  3. Miriam Cherry says:

    As usual Larry, great work on an interesting and important topic.

  4. Lawrence Cunningham says:

    Thanks Miriam!

  5. royal lea says:

    I just learned that stok v citibank has settled and as part of the settlement the cert proceedings are dismissed. I think rationalizing the prejudice standard and explaining how that rationalization–whatever it turned out to be–fit into what clearly should be state law would have been very difficult to do. Not that it couldn’t or wouldn’t have been done. But I don’t think it would have been pretty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Anti-spam image