Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration

Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration

Share

Smith v. Spizziri is this week’s item on the court’s bountiful menu of cases under the Federal Arbitration Act. The question here is what options are available to a trial court that decides to send a case to arbitration. Must it stay the matter or, instead, does it have the option to dismiss it entirely? Discussion at the argument suggested that the justices were skeptical about the practical consequences of dismissal, so Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s opinion for a unanimous … Read the rest

Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration

Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration

Share

Monday’s argument in Smith v. Spizziri was this month’s case under the Federal Arbitration Act. This one explores what a trial court can do when it refers a pending suit to arbitration. Section 3 of the FAA says that if the court refers the case to arbitration, it “shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial of the action until such arbitration has been had.” The question is whether the trial court, instead of staying the … Read the rest

Justices dubious of creating “extra-special super-super clear statement rule” to exempt tribes from obligation to respect bankruptcy process

Justices dubious of creating “extra-special super-super clear statement rule” to exempt tribes from obligation to respect bankruptcy process

Share

Monday’s arguments in Lac du Flambeau Band v. Coughlin revealed a bench deeply skeptical of the argument that Native American tribes should be exempt from the automatic stay of the Bankruptcy Code even though the federal and state governments are not.

The case involves an online payday lending operation of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. Brian Coughlin borrowed money from the Band’s lending operation. When he then filed for bankruptcy the Band ignored the … Read the rest

In New York bid-rigging case, justices are dubious of the “right to control” theory of fraud

In New York bid-rigging case, justices are dubious of the “right to control” theory of fraud

Share

The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Monday in the case of Louis Ciminelli, an executive convicted of federal wire fraud in connection with bid-rigging to secure a $ 750 million New York state contract. The trial court informed a federal jury regarding a “right to control” theory of fraud, and the jury convicted Ciminelli. At argument, Justice Neil Gorsuch remarked at the “radical agreement” among all that the right-to-control theory was flawed, but there was less consensus as … Read the rest