ADR LAW & POLICY UPDATE

Federal Cases

Fifth Circuit: Extrastatutory "Manifest Disregard" Vacatur Dead After Hall Street
Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. v. Bacon, No. 07-20670, 2009 WL 542780 (5th Cir. Mar. 5, 2009)
3/5/2009

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has forcefully rejected any extrastatutory grounds for vacatur or modification of an arbitral award under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"), declaring "manifest disregard" dead after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hall Street.

In Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. v. Bacon, No. 07-20670, 2009 WL 542780 (5th Cir. Mar. 5, 2009), Bacon demanded arbitration of a dispute regarding withdrawals from her investment account with Citigroup. The arbitrator eventually issued an award in favor of Bacon. Citigroup moved the district court for vacatur, alleging that the arbitrator engaged in manifest disregard of the law. The district court vacated the award, finding Bacon suffered no actual damages from the withdrawals, Bacon failed to timely report the withdrawals to Citigroup as required by Texas law, and the arbitrator failed to apportion damages among all responsible parties... Full Story

Class Action Waiver Held Unconscionable for Sherman Act Claims Due to Anticipated “Prohibitive” Expert Costs to Individuals
In re Am. Express Merchants’ Litig., 554 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. Jan. 30, 2009)
1/30/2009

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a class action waiver requiring individual arbitration of business-to-business claims may be unconscionable and unenforceable if its enforcement would impose prohibitive expert costs that would effectively preclude vindication of plaintiffs’ statutory rights under the Sherman Act.

In In re Am. Express Merchants’ Litig., 554 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. Jan. 30, 2009), a group of merchants that had contracted with American Express (“AE”) to accept its credit and charge cards brought a class action lawsuit against AE for alleged antitrust violations under the Sherman Act. AE responded by moving to compel individual arbitration of the merchants’ claims in accordance with a broad arbitration agreement and class action waiver in the merchants’ contracts. The merchants opposed, alleging that they could not effectively pursue a remedy in individual arbitrations because of the small amounts of individual damages at stake... Full Story

FAA Cannot Preempt Pennsylvania’s Statutory Requirement that Settlement Transfer Contracts Must Have Court Approval to Be Enforced
Allstate Settlement Corp. v. Rapid Settlements, Ltd., No. 07-3224, 2009 WL 514080 (3rd Cir. Mar. 3, 2009)
3/3/2009

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement is not bound by the FAA to comply with the terms of an award requiring it to redirect settlement payments in accordance with a settlement transfer contract that violates state law.

In Allstate Settlement Corp. v. Rapid Settlements, Ltd., No. 07-3224, 2009 WL 514080 (3rd Cir. Mar. 3, 2009), Allstate entered into a settlement agreement with Ward in regard to a personal injury claim. Allstate was to make periodic payments to Ward, funded by the purchase of an annuity issued by Allstate. The settlement agreement contained a Pennsylvania choice of law provision... Full Story

Federal Court Rejects Arkansas Lack of Mutuality and Unconscionability Defenses to Arbitration Agreement
Easter v. Compucredit Corp., No. 08-CV-1041, 2009 WL 499384 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 27, 2009)
2/27/2009

A federal district court in Arkansas has rejected lack of mutuality and unconscionability arguments as presented in opposition to a motion to compel arbitration.

In Easter v. Compucredit Corp., No. 08-CV-1041, 2009 WL 499384 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 27, 2009), plaintiffs brought an action personally and as a class against parent corporation Compucredit for actions its subsidiaries took in the operation of a business named First American Cash Advance (“FACA”)... Full Story

Michigan Choice of Law Provision Does Not Displace FAA When Parties Fail to Make That Intent “Abundantly Clear”
Volk v. X-Rite, Inc., No. 4:08-CV-00054-JEG, 2009 WL 522943 (S.D. Iowa Mar. 2, 2009)
3/2/2009

An Iowa federal district court has declined to apply Michigan’s more permissive standard for vacatur of arbitration awards, noting the parties failed to express their intent to displace federal law in an abundantly clear manner as required by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

In Volk v. X-Rite, Inc., No. 4:08-CV-00054-JEG, 2009 WL 522943 (S.D. Iowa Mar. 2, 2009), Volk was hired by X-Rite as a field representative. In 2003, the parties signed an arbitration agreement encompassing all disputes arising out of their relationship, which included a Michigan choice of law provision. The parties entered into subsequent agreements with similar terms in 2004 and 2005. X-Rite terminated Volk’s representative status in January of 2006 for unspecified business reasons... Full Story

Absent Specific Statutory Ground for Vacatur, Federal Court Must Confirm Arbitration Award
Theriault v. FIA Card Servs., No. Civ. A. 07-2978, 2009 WL 483832, (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2009)
2/20/2009

A federal district court in Louisiana has found that it is required to confirm an arbitration award unless a specific ground can be established under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) for vacatur or correction of an award.

In Theriault v. FIA Card Servs., No. Civ. A. 07-2978, 2009 WL 483832, (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2009), involved plaintiff Theriault’s use of a credit card. The parties agreed to arbitrate account-related disputes in an arbitration proceeding administered by the FORUM. At arbitration, an award was issued in favor of FIA in the amount of $49,233.74. The Court confirmed the award upon FIA’s petition. However, Theriault moved for reconsideration of the confirmation on the numerous grounds, including that there was no valid arbitration agreement... Full Story

Federal District Court Quashes Subpoena of Appraiser Arbitrator
Mauna Kea Resort v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., No. CV09094LDWWDW, 2009 WL 578529 (E.D.N.Y., Mar. 4, 2009)
3/4/2009

The Federal District Court of Eastern New York applied arbitral immunity principles to quash a subpoena directed toward an appraiser arbitrator prior to hearing.

In Mauna Kea Resort v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., No. CV09094LDWWDW, 2009 WL 578529 (E.D.N.Y., Mar. 4, 2009), two parties were involved in a dispute over earthquake damage to hotel properties that was subject to a three-arbitrator appraisal panel. One of the parties, Affiliated, selected its appraiser. Before selecting its arbitrator, the other party, Mauna Kea, served a subpoena against Affiliated’s arbitrator, J.S. Held, in connection with its attempt to resist an appraisal hearing. Affiliated moved to quash the subpoena, and the Court granted their motion... Full Story

Federal Court Upholds Arbitration Agreement with Class Action Waiver and Validates National Arbitration Forum as Fair Arbitral Forum
Adler v. Dell, Inc., No. 08-CV-13170, 2008 WL 5351042 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 18, 2008)
12/18/2008

In granting a motion to compel arbitration, a federal court in Michigan held that where a class action waiver does not prevent the vindication of statutory rights and there is no specific state legislation banning class action waivers, an arbitration agreement is enforceable.

In Adler v. Dell, Inc., No. 08-CV-13170, 2008 WL 5351042 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 18, 2008), Adler brought a purported class action against Dell under the Michigan Consumers Protection Act (MCPA) and Michigan Pricing and Advertising Act (MPAA). Dell moved to compel arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement in the parties’ purchase contract. Adler opposed, arguing that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable because it banned class actions in contradiction to the public policy underlying the MCPA and MPAA. In addition, Adler alleged that the National Arbitration Forum (NAF), the designated arbitration administrator, was not a fair forum for consumers... Full Story

State Cases

Arizona Appellate Court Orders Court-Annexed Arbitration of Claim Seeking $500,000 for One Malfunctioning Computer
Fishman v. Gateway Inc., No. 1 CA-CV 08-0125, 2009 WL 532558 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 3, 2009)
3/3/2009

Eliciting an admission from a consumer that his damages claim for one malfunctioning computer did not warrant the $500,000 prayed for in his complaint, an Arizona Appeals Court has reversed a trial court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration, finding the consumer tacitly agreed to arbitrate his claims by accepting the terms of an agreement within materials shipped with the computer.

In Fishman v. Gateway Inc., No. 1 CA-CV 08-0125, 2009 WL 532558 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 3, 2009), Fishman sued Microsoft, Best Buy, and Gateway for $500,000 in damages stemming from the receipt of a a malfunctioning Gateway computer purchased from Best Buy and installed by Geek Squad. Gateway filed a motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. The trial court denied the motion and Gateway appealed... Full Story

California Court of Appeal Holds Prohibition on State Wage and Hour Claims in Arbitration Preempted by FAA
Popescu v. Keyes European, LLC, No. B207968, 2009 WL 656415 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2009)
3/16/2009

Narrow prohibitions on the arbitration of certain employment-related disputes under California law are preempted when federal law controls the parties’ arbitration agreement, according to a California Court of Appeal.

In Popescu v. Keyes European, LLC, No. B207968, 2009 WL 656415 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2009), Popescu was employed by Keyes. Popescu sued, claiming that Keyes denied him wages and certain rest periods guaranteed by California statute. Keyes moved to compel arbitration of Popescu’s claims, pointing to two arbitration agreements Popescu had signed during the course of his employment. The trial court denied the motion, holding that the arbitration agreement did not comply with California law... Full Story

California Court Affirms Confirmation of Award Ordering Discovery Sanctions
Bak v. MCL Financial Group, Inc., 88 Cal.Rptr.3d 800 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2009)
1/30/2009

A California appellate court has held that an attorney may be sanctioned during arbitral proceedings as an agent of a signatory client, and an attorney cannot claim his or her non-signatory status as a basis by which to challenge the panel’s authority.

In Bak v. MCL Financial Group, Inc., 88 Cal.Rptr.3d 800 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2009), attorney for defendants MCL Financial Group appealed a judgment confirming an arbitral award. The attorney contended that the arbitrators exceeded their powers by ordering him to pay $7,500 in sanctions for copying documents during a prehearing dispute over the production of documents. Plaintiffs Bak’s counsel had inadvertently sent to MCL Financial Group’s attorney certain documents for which Bak claimed attorney-client privilege. The trial court entered a judgment confirming part of the arbitral award including the sanctions order... Full Story

Arbitrator and Counsel’s Joint Membership in Social Organization, Attendance at Social Functions Does Not Evidence Arbitrator Bias
Christensen v. Smith, Nos. G039923, G040103, 2009 WL 499748 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 2009)
3/2/2009

A California Court of Appeals has held that arbitrator bias is not evident merely because the arbitrator is a member of the same social organization as a party’s counsel and may attend the same social functions as members of the organization.

In Christensen v. Smith, Nos. G039923, G040103, 2009 WL 499748 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 2009), Smith bought the Christensens’ home in Newport Beach for $8.35 million. After moving in, Smith was informed by the city that the home’s second dock actually belonged to the neighbor and would be torn down. The parties submitted the issue of whether the Christensens failed to disclose the true ownership of the dock to binding arbitration... Full Story

Louisiana Appellate Court Holds Fraudulent Inducement Claims Are Not Arbitrable
Long v. Jeb Breithaupt Design Build Inc., No. 44,002-CA, 2009 WL 455547 (La. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2009)
2/25/2009

A Louisiana appellate court has affirmed the rule that fraud or misrepresentation as to the formation of a contract as a whole is not an arbitrable issue under Louisiana law.

In Long v. Jeb Breithaupt Design Build Inc., No. 44,002-CA, 2009 WL 455547 (La. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2009), Long entered into two restoration and remodeling services contracts with Jeb Breithaupt Design Build, Inc. (“Jeb”). After work began and three-fourths of the total amount of the two contracts was paid, Long ceased payments on the work, disputing the quality of Jeb’s work... Full Story

North Dakota Supreme Court Holds Summary Judgment Improper Under South Dakota Law When Motion to Compel Arbitration Is Pending
Citibank (South Dakota) NA v. Reikowski, 760 N.W.2d 97 (N.D. Feb. 3, 2009)
2/3/2009

According to the North Dakota Supreme Court, a trial court must resolve any motions to compel arbitration that are pending before granting summary judgment, whether those motions are brought under federal or South Dakota arbitration law.

In Citibank (South Dakota) NA v. Reikowski, 760 N.W.2d 97 (N.D. Feb. 3, 2009), Reikowski obtained a credit card from Citibank. The contract between the parties contained an arbitration agreement encompassing all claims arising out of the contract. After Reikowski allegedly failed to pay over $13,000 owed on the account, Citibank sued Reikowski for the balance in a North Dakota trial court. When Reikowski failed to respond, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Citibank... Full Story

More Rigorous Review of Arbitral Award Required Under New Jersey’s Alternative Procedure for Dispute Resolution Act (APDRA)
DIA of Jersey City v. Fogari, No. A-2593-07T1, 2009 WL 483143 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Feb 27, 2009)
2/27/2009

A trial court erroneously applied the relaxed standards of the New Jersey Arbitration Act rather than the more stringent Alternative Procedure for Dispute Resolution Act (APDRA) standard of review to the decision of a statutory private umpire, according to a New Jersey appellate court.

In DIA of Jersey City v. Fogari, No. A-2593-07T1, 2009 WL 483143 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Feb 27, 2009), a business dispute was referred to a private umpire, pursuant to the APDRA, with the parties’ consent. The umpire issued an award ruling in part for plaintiffs and in part for defendants. The trial court sustained the umpire’s written findings in all respects and entered a final judgment. Both parties sought review of various substantive issues of law and fact, claiming error on the part of the umpire. The issues on appeal centered on the appropriate standard of review of an umpire’s award... Full Story

While Reiterating Favored Status of Arbitration Agreements, Texas Supreme Court Holds Jury Waivers Presumptively Valid if Conspicuous
In re Bank of America, N.A., No. 07-0901, 2009 WL 490065 (Tex. Feb 27, 2009)
2/27/2009

The Texas Supreme Court has held that contractual jury waivers are presumptively enforceable as “knowing and voluntary” if conspicuous, according the same deference to contractual jury waivers as that accorded to arbitration agreements.

In In re Bank of America, N.A., No. 07-0901, 2009 WL 490065 (Tex. Feb 27, 2009), Mikey’s Houses and Bank of America entered into certain real estate contracts. An addendum to these contracts contained a jury trial waiver. When Mikey’s Houses brought an action for breach of contract, fraud, and other claims arising out of the real estate contracts and demanded a jury trial, Bank of America moved to enforce the jury waiver. The trial court enforced the waiver, but the intermediate court reversed, finding that Mikey’s Houses did not “knowingly and voluntarily” waive its right to a jury trial in accordance with the rule stated in In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 130-33 (Tex. 2004)... Full Story

Virginia Supreme Court Declares Orders Compelling Arbitration Non-Appealable
Seguin v. Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp., No. 080217, 2009 WL 485041 (Va. Feb 27, 2009)
2/27/2009

According to the Virginia Supreme Court, an order compelling arbitration is not an appealable matter under Virginia law.

In Seguin v. Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp., No. 080217, 2009 WL 485041 (Va. Feb 27, 2009), Northrop employed Seguin. During Seguin’s employment, she received unilateral e-mails and memoranda advising her that continued employment signified her agreement to the new arbitration requirements contained in the company’s Dispute Resolution Process. Seguin never signed an arbitration agreement; however, she did continue her employment... Full Story

ADR Legislation & Regulation

LEGISLATION

DE H 18
PRIMARY SPONSOR: Plant [D]
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: HOUSE
Commentary: This bill purports to change the law surrounding the relationship of employers and at will employees by requiring employers to have “good cause” to fire at will employees who have worked for the employer for more than one year. As it relates to arbitration, the bill specifically states that both pre and post dispute arbtration agreements between the employer and employee that provide for private arbitration will be enforceable. In addition, either party may demand arbitration with the Department of Labor if no private arbitration agreement exists between the parties. The Department is responsible for adopting rules regarding the qualification, method of selection, and appointment of arbitrators.

DE H 49
PRIMARY SPONSOR: Marshall M [D]
TITLE: Court of Chancery
DISPOSITION: Passed House to Senate
LOCATION: SENATE
Commentary: The bill regulates the Court of Chancery. As it relates to arbitration, the bill makes a few changes to the Delaware UAA to conform it to practice throughout the United States. The bill also authorizes the parties to have a member of the Court of Chancery arbitrate their dispute while guaranteeing the parties confidentiality.

FL H 27
COMPARE: FL H 419, FL H 1397, FL S 998, FL S 2302
SIMILAR: FL S 2604
AUTHOR: Ambler [R]
TITLE: Residential Properties
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: House General Government Policy Council
Commentary: A bill that would revise Florida’s mandatory presuit mediation/arbitration program involving homeowner’s association disputes. Some changes include: 1) requiring that the notice of dispute be delivered before referral to mediation or arbitration; 2) creating a statutory notice form for referral to mediation and arbitration; 3) requiring delivery by certified mail or personal delivery; 4) providing penalties for failure to mediate or arbitrate; and 5) creating an opt out provision.

FL H 1045
COMPARE: FL S 2412
AUTHOR: Hudson [R]
TITLE: Debt Settlement Services
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: HOUSE
Commentary: Relates to debt settlement providers and specifies notice requirements for providers to consumers. As it relates to arbitration, the bill provides that a debt settlement agreement, except as permitted by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. s. 2, as amended, or the Uniform Arbitration Act, may not contain modifications or limitations to otherwise available forums or procedural rights, including the right to trial by jury, which are generally available to the client under law and under the act.

FL H 1135
IDENTICAL: FL S 2192
AUTHOR: Poppell [R]
TITLE: Florida Consumer and Small Business Arbitration Act
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: HOUSE
Commentary: A previous prohibition on predispute arbitration agreements has been amended to instead state that all contracts for goods or services shall conspicuously disclose any conditions placed upon the right to terminate the contract, including any provisions that provide for a right to cure; and any conditions or procedures relating to breach of contract or remedies for breach of contract, including any provisions related to arbitration. All such disclosures must be in bold type and placed within a separate paragraph and shall provide, in immediate proximity to each of the provisions, a space reserved in the contract for the signature of all parties to specifically acknowledge having read each of such provisions. Failure to provide such spaces for signature and to obtain the signatures of all parties shall render the applicable contract provisions void and unenforceable.

FL S 2524
IDENTICAL: FL H 653
AUTHOR: Lawson [D]
TITLE: Homestead Property Foreclosure Actions
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Banking and Insurance Committee
Commentary: Would enact the “Foreclosure Bill of Rights.” The bill would regulate residential mortgage foreclosures and, among other things, make all foreclosure actions subject to court ordered mediation.

ID H 36
AUTHOR: Agricultural Affairs Cmt
TITLE: Pure Seed Law
DISPOSITION: Enacted
LOCATION: Chaptered
Commentary: The bill “Amends existing law relating to the Pure Seed Law to revise provisions relating to the State Seed Advisory Board; and to revise provisions relating to seed arbitration and the Seed Arbitration Council.” The bill imposes a conspicuous notice requirement and makes the arbitration binding.

ME H 875
LD: 1256
AUTHOR: Flaherty [D]
TITLE: Consumer Contracts
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: HOUSE
Commentary: Would amend the Maine Arbitration Act to prohibit predispute arbitration agreements in consumer contracts.

ME S 433
LD: 1185
AUTHOR: Craven [D]
TITLE: Employment Termination
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Joint Committee on Labor
Commentary: A bill relating to employment termination that establishes regulations and procedures. As it relates to ADR, Section 3154(1)(H) provides that either employee or employer may agree to arbitration by express written agreement. Provides for procedures, such as filing for the demand of arbitration, arbitrator selection, and procedural rules.

MI S 363
SPONSOR: Allen [R]
TITLE: Recreational Vehicle Regulation
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Second Reading Committee Reports
Commentary: This proposed bill regulates the dealer manufacturer relationship in the area of recreational vehicles. As it relates to ADR, the bill states that “A manufacturer may not coerce or attempt to coerce a dealer to enter into an agreement with the manufacturer or any other person that requires the dealer to submit its disputes to binding arbitration.” Thus, the bill does not prohibit binding arbitration agreements, but does prevent manufacturers from threatening to terminate relationships, withhold product lines, or delay delivery if the dealer does not agree to binding arbitration.

In contrast, the bill requires a party to demand mediation before bringing a civil suit.

MN H 914
COMPANION: MN S 806
AUTHOR: Davnie [DFL]
TITLE: Financial Institutions
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: House Civil Justice
Commentary: This bill, relating to short-term lending, had stated, “No contract or agreement between a consumer short-term loan lender and a borrower residing in Minnesota may contain a mandatory arbitration provision.” The bill was amended March 26, 2009 to remove any reference to arbitration.

MN S 616
COMPANION: MN H 722
AUTHOR: Rest [DFL]
TITLE: Taxation
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Taxes Committee
Commentary: The bill regulates tax preparers. The bill had previously prohibited a tax preparation contract from including a mandatory arbitration clause, but was amended on 3/23/09 to instead permit predispute arbitration agreements, but require a 30 day opt out period.

MT H 322
AUTHOR: Blewett [D]
TITLE: Fair Arbitrators Act
DISPOSITION: To Governor
LOCATION: To Governor
Commentary: The bill specifically regulates arbitration. It imposes various disclosure requirements for arbitrators and provides grounds for vacating awards based on failure to disclose information. Among disclosures required under this statute would be the requirement that arbitrators disclose all previous appearances in which a party to the current arbitration had appeared before them. This is nearly identical to Cal. Code of Civil Procedure 1281.9(a). The bill was amended to establish an enactment date of October 1, 2014.

NC S 877
AUTHOR: Clodfelter [D]
TITLE: Health Benefit Plan Provider Contracts
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Commerce Committee
Commentary: This bill would prohibit binding predispute arbitration agreements between health plans and health care providers.

NH H 198
AUTHOR: Nixon [D]
TITLE: Motor Vehicle Accidents
DISPOSITION: Failed
LOCATION: Died
Commentary: The bill permits an insured person seeking damages under his uninsured motorist coverage to use arbitration to resolve the dispute with the insurer. To the extent that an insured person’s damages exceed the limits of the motorist insurance coverage of the person at fault for the accident, the insurer shall be responsible for the remaining damages against the insured person’s own policy up to the limits of the uninsured motorist coverage provided by such policy. The amount of damages to be paid shall be determined by an arbitration panel consisting of one attorney selected by the insurer; one attorney selected by the insured; and one attorney selected by the attorney selected by the insurer and the attorney selected by the insured.

NV A 525
AUTHOR: Health and Human Services Cmt
TITLE: Division of Medical Professional Boards
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee
Commentary: A bill relating to the various departments established to deal with health care matters. Provides that malpractice claims may be submitted to arbitration or mediation.

NV S 355
AUTHOR: Judiciary Cmt
TITLE: Debt Management Services Act
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
Commentary: A bill enacting the Uniform Debt Management Act and repealing other laws related to the regulation of debt adjusters. States that an agreement may not include a provision that limits available forums or procedural rights, except as provided in the FAA or NRS.

TX S 1650
AUTHOR: Duncan [R]
TITLE: Federal Arbitration Case Appeals
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate State Affairs Committee
Commentary: Would add a section to the Texas Arbitration act stating, “In a matter subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. Section 1 et seq.), a person may take an appeal or writ of error to the court of appeals from the judgment or interlocutory order of a district court, county court at law, or county court under the same circumstances that an appeal from a federal district court’s order or decision would be permitted by 9 U.S.C. Section 16.”

US H 1728
SPONSOR: Miller B [D]
TITLE: Reforming Consumer Mortgage Practices
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: House Financial Services Committee
Commentary: Relates to residential mortgage loans. As it relates to arbitration, the bill states, “No residential mortgage loan and no extension of credit under an open end consumer credit plan secured by the principal dwelling of the consumer, other than a reverse mortgage, may include terms which require arbitration or any other nonjudicial procedure as the method for resolving any controversy or settling any claims arising out of the transaction.”

VT S 51
AUTHOR: Shumlin [D]
TITLE: Franchise Practices
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: Senate Finance Committee
Commentary: The bill imposes various restrictions on arbitration in motor franchise agreements. It only allows post dispute arbitration and restricts provisions limiting remedies or forums.

WV H 3278
SPONSOR: Perry [D]
TITLE: Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association
DISPOSITION: Pending
LOCATION: House Banking and Insurance Committee
Commentary: A bill amending laws related to the life and health insurance guaranty association. Requires that any disputes over amounts due to the association or the reinsurer be resolved through binding arbitration, or as otherwise provided by law if no arbitration clause has been contracted.

REGULATION

None